dinda@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Peter A. Dinda - MIC@MACC - 608/263/7744) (05/26/91)
In article <1991May25.042015.17871@CAM.ORG>, pascal@CAM.ORG (Pascal Gosselin) writes... >I guess this was the result of Apple rushing to establish a 7.0 features >list when OS/2 with Presentation Manager came out. If you look back, the >OS/2 PM threat remains a joke. I've only seen it in magazines! I've >never seen a store that demoed it, I've never known a user that uses it. That's 600,000+ copies of OS/2 have been sold. Much development for OS/2 and PM goes on in corporate america, where connectivity is king. IBM Guide to OS/2 applications lists over 1500 applications with over 300 of them PM based. There is also a hearty bunch of OS/2 users that are well represented in the comp.os.os2.* newsgroups. >too bad in a way, since OS/2 with PM is probably the most underrated OS. This Amen!!---^ >thing has REAL multitasking, Virtual Memory, Threads, etc... and has had OS/2 1.x supports pre-emptive multitasking of OS/2 full screen, Windowed, and PM applications. 2.x also supports pre-emptive multitasking of Windows and DOS applications. 1.x virtual memory is segemented memory and is more difficult for the programmer to deal with than 2.x's flat paged memory. Up to 255 threads of execution (not only can different apps be multitasked, but also different parts of the *same* app can run - take a look at Pagemaker for OS/2 PM sometime - it has a user interaction thread and a process thread - the result is that hourglass (ie, wristwatch) time is minimized) in 1.x and over 2000 threads in 2.x. >these features from day 1 (>2 years ago). Apple is really lucky that OS/2 1.0 was released in 1987. OS/2 1.1, the first version with PM, was released in 1988. >MicroSoft doesn't know how to market and enhance this product, it *might* of Microsoft knew how to market, but they were more interested in screwing IBM with Windows. The FTC is finding some very interesting things at Microsoft. >made a lot of damage in the marketplace. Imagine OS/2 with PM for $99 instead IBM is now selling OS/2 1.3 for $150 list with a free upgrade to 2.0 when it becomes available later this year - 2.0 is sort of like the System 7 of the PC world - promised early, delivered late. The upgrade to 1.3 from any previous version of OS/2 is free, and the upgrade from DOS is $99 and you still keep your DOS license (ie, no risk) OS/2 1.3 and 2.x are mostly IBM written products while 1.0 to 1.2 were mostly mickeysoft's. >of the $325 they were asking for at the time, Windows 3 would not have >existed ! The $325 was not the major factor. The problem was three fold: - PM did not ship with OS/2 1.0 and people evidently were counting on the GUI more than the other advanced features, which take some time to sink in if you are used to using DOS or the Mac. - Until 1989, memory was incredibly expensive and OS/2 requires a lot of it (2 MB minimal, 4 MB recommended for 1.x) The total upgrade at the time included a ~$1000/MB cost for the memory! - While many companies commited to OS/2 PM (Word Perfect, Lotus Dev, Ashton Tate, Borland, etc.) - Microsoft's support and development products were initially pretty hideous. >Luckily for Apple, Windows 3.0 has almost replaced the OS/2 with PM combo >as the environment of choice on PCs. This ensures a healthy future for IBM is taking direct aim at Microsoft with OS/2 2.x and will launch a massive propaganda barrage (ala Microsoft) on release at yearend. >the Mac OS, since an enhanced version of OS/2 with PM would have some >SERIOUS advantages over the Mac in terms of multitasking/multithreading >capabilities. I've used PCs since they first came out and have programmed for OS/2 and Windows - I would agree with you with regard to *technical* advantage, however, I think even with a successful OS/2 campaign, the Mac is *not* going to disappear for two reasons: - Macs are much easier to use for people who receive no training. I *like* the flexibility of the PM GUI, but it is simply not as obvious as the finder. Sometimes seasoned PC users and consultants forget that the typical individual computer buyer goes for ease of use and wants nothing more than a word processor. - It has become firmly etched on the public mind that Macs are easier to use than PCs. Even Microsoft's advertisements for Windows compare ease of use to DOS, not to the Mac. Maybe after Windows/PM has been around for 1991-1984=7 years this will change, but I doubt it. Cheers! +-----------------------------+---------------------------------------+ : Peter A. Dinda : Microcomputer Information Center at : : dinda@VMS.macc.wisc.edu <*> : The Madison Academic Computing Center : : dinda@garfield.cs.wisc.edu : 1210 W Dayton St., 1150A : : "Survivor of Beamerland '90": Madison, WI 53706 : : "Apple: Business by Lawsuit": 608 263 7744 : : "OOPs!" : #include <stddisclaimer.h> : +-----------------------------+---------------------------------------+