David_Wright@f170.n771.z3.fidonet.org (David Wright) (05/17/91)
BB> > Huge memory appetite? Sluggish performance?
BB>
BB> Unfortunately these are correct attributes for the current Lotus OS/2
BB> offerings. They do take a *lot* of memory and the performance isn't
BB> anything to write home about for either 123/G or Freelance.
BB>
BB> Bill
What pisses me off is these guys are impying that a Windows version won't
be a memory hog, and will run faster. Apparently only by vitue of running
under Windows.
Dave
--- msged 1.99G OS/2
* Origin: The IdleNews (1:153/905.4)David_Wright@f170.n771.z3.fidonet.org (David Wright) (05/18/91)
SL> Then how come no articles on 2.0? Thats the current state with OS/2
SL> but they continue to ignore it in favor of more windows garbage or stab
SL> it.
Agreed. If they're going to run articles on Win32, they should be
comparing it to what OS/2 2.x is going to be in 1993, not what OS/2 1.1 was
two years ago. At the very least they should compare it to what OS/2 2.0 is
today. If they had any integrity, they wouldn't review vaporware at all.
For the last two years I've read: Don't buy OS/2 now, wait for the 386
version. Now I read: Don't buy OS/2 now, wait for Win32. When the 586
ships, what will we have to wait for?
Dave
--- msged 1.99G OS/2
* Origin: The IdleNews (1:153/905.4)Steve_Lesner@f170.n771.z3.fidonet.org (Steve Lesner) (05/18/91)
DW> Then there's the Editors' choice sidebar: DW> DW> You can get an idea of what to expect from Lotus's Windows product by DW> looking at Freelance Graphics for OS/2.____Unfortunately, the huge DW> memory appetite, sluggish performance, and shortage of drivers of the DW> OS/2 version (a real drawback of using OS/2 today) make it impossible to Thats exactly what I was trying to tell Wynne. Thanks for re-emphazing that article. In the last few months (and most of a year or so) PC-Mag is filled with this sort of OS/2 stabbing. I'm glad I'm not the only one that has the ability to see the "anti-os/2" gist of that magazine. --- Maximus-CBCS v1.02.OS/2.B0 * Origin: Uh Huh, OS/2, I've got the right one Baby, Uh Huh (1:141/261)
Steve_Lesner@f170.n771.z3.fidonet.org (Steve Lesner) (05/18/91)
BB> > Huge memory appetite? Sluggish performance? BB> BB> Unfortunately these are correct attributes for the current Lotus OS/2 BB> offerings. They do take a *lot* of memory and the performance isn't 8 megs and they both run like Metro North -- on time and reliable. Granted, 8 megs is a bit much, but it ain't that expensive. And really, if you can compare the capabilities these programs offer to something in DOS or Windows, it most likely either does not exist or still needs 4 megs in say Windows. So what the bottom line should be (IMHO) is ya need 4 megs more than running heequivalent in Windows. Total Cost, about $300 or less. And this is actually only for 123/g. Freelance will run fine in 6 megs (OS/2) and even 4 megs for that matter. 123/g must have 6-8 megs or its a slouch, I must admit. But Bill, I've said this all too many times. OS/2 is for power users. Windows is for power users. Today, anyone can be a power user who can afford a 386 (dx or sx for that matter) and 4-8 megs of memory and a $500 ide 100 meg hard drive. The advantages of OS/2 is obvious to most of us here and should be the logical choice. The problem with PC-Rag and other mags is that they don't show the pitfalls of chossing Windows apps. Sure there are plenty of them, but Windows is a broken OS and needs *just* about as much resources as OS/2. So, the average reader reads PC-mag and comes away thinking "Oh, OS/2 looks so bulky, let me go out and spend just about the same amount of money with Windows". And there, lies the fallacy. If they want to lead the blind, then they might as well lead em' back to DOS for gods sake. And for me,I've gotten my sight back long ago. 8-) I've seen the promised land, and in no way, shape or form is it Windows. And yet, Windows is all anyone talks about. Why? God only knows. Maybe its a conspiracy. But I think a lot of it is mis-interpreted (not really mis- quoted) information. So what PC-Mag and other mags need to reflect upon, is not what they are writing, but what the hell the users that read it are reading out of it! Its called perspective, and PC Mag is telling truths, granted, but NOT IN THE PROPER PERSPECTIVES! By the way, have you tryed 123/g with OS/2 1.3 with about 8 megs. There was A BIG difference in performance with 8 megs when I switched from 1.2 to 1.3! --- Maximus-CBCS v1.02.OS/2.B0 * Origin: Uh Huh, OS/2, I've got the right one Baby, Uh Huh (1:141/261)
Mark_Lehrer@f170.n771.z3.fidonet.org (Mark Lehrer) (05/18/91)
SL> WS> I'm not sure it is fair to rag on PC Magazine for hilighting Windows SL> WS> and not overly emphasizing OS/2. It is their job to try to report SL> WS> the current state of the industry, whether they believe it is the SL> SL> Then how come no articles on 2.0? Thats the current state with OS/2 but SL> they continue to ignore it in favor of more windows garbage or stab it. 2.0 is in an early beta stage. I don't want to hear about 2.0 unless it is shipping or I join IBM's beta program (which will be HUGE), or someone is describing some new features that will be in 2.0. 1.3 is the current state of OS/2, and will be until the next shipping release! Don't lose sight of that just because you have a copy of 2.0 (boy, it must be nice). --- Maximus-CBCS v1.02-OS/2-R4 * Origin: The Akron Anomaly - 320 meg - V32bis/HST - 2 lines (1:157/535)
Joe_Salemi@f170.n771.z3.fidonet.org (Joe Salemi) (05/19/91)
In a message to Wynne Stepp <14 May 91 00:20> David Wright wrote: DW> Is it fair to "rag" on PC Magazine? Until they take a serious DW> look at OS/2 1.3, which is less a memory hog and faster than DW> Windows, yes I think so. "They" already DID take a look at OS/2 1.3 -- Issue dated 2/12/91, First Looks. The conclusion of the author (me) is: "The additional features of 1.3 are a good indication of the capabilities that 2.0 will have. But unless a flood of OS/2 applications appear over the next few months, users without an immediate need for OS/2's features should probably wait for OS/2 2.0." Unfortunately, for 80% of the PC users out there, that's still true -- there just aren't a lot of OS/2 apps out yet. I can hardly be accused of being an "OS/2 basher" -- and like Charles P., I firmly wait for OS/2 2.0 to be the breakout product, and fervently hope that IBM gets it right, and it DOES becomes as successful as it deserves. --- XRS! 4.14+ * Origin: Max's Doghouse Remote Kennel /703-548-7849/ (RAX 1:109/136.1)
cs_b144@ux.kingston.ac.uk (Ian Stickland) (05/23/91)
I've used Freelance/G on a PS/2 model 80 (16MHz 80386) with 10 meg of
memory and plenty of room for the swap file. I've read the offending
article and I have to agree with points made about it being sluggish
and the lack of printer drivers.
1). Unless you have an old IBM 3852 Color (tm U.S.A.) Jetprinter
or a very expensive colour postcript QMS printer, you can
only get black and white output. As the IBM printer is pretty
bad and discontinued (by Canon) you are left with colour PS.
For a paint package I think this is a bit pointless. What we
need are printer drivers for printers such as the HP PaintJet,
which to my knowledge is very common. (If one exists let me
know, as I need a PaintJet driver for OS/2 badly). Until such
drivers exist it would be foolish to recommend Freelance/G to
anyone except those lucky enough to afford colour postscript.
2). It is more than sluggish on the above configuration with IBM
OS/2 EE 1.2. It's downright awful. It was the only process on
the system and it was struggling. Printing near enough seized
the whole machine. It really was pathetic. The printer was a
Xerox 4030 in HP LJII emulation mode with 2.5MB memory.
I have to disagree completely though when they conclude that Freelance for
Windows will be worth waiting for on the showing of Freelance/G. It won't.
It will be even slower, and a real memory and resource hog.
Another gripe against Freelance/G, is that when you send a presentation to
print you get a formatting ducument dialog box appear with a Cancel button.
I COULD NOT PRESS IT, THE POINTER WAS DISABLED and showing the user's worst
enemy the HOURGLASS. Why provide a cancel button when you can't press it??
Seeing as I have only used it on 1.2, the speed problem may have improved on
1.3 (if it has I'll be impressed, as it would be SOME improvement), but the
printer situation has not, if the 1.3 announcement letters containing supported
printers were anything to go by.
I don't care who people think should write the drivers, get on with it. (IBM,
Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard, it's one of you three...).
Despite the above, I think Freelance/G is a great product and Lotus deserves
a lot of praise for it. It is extremely easy to get a smart presentation on
screen, I managed a couple of slides in about half-an-hour after installation,
and no I've never used the DOS version. (I've hardly used DOS ever infact, OS/2
rules for me). The performace needs tuning, and the printer support needs to
exist in the first place, when that's been done I'm sure that Freelance/G will
be an editors choice and expose the windows version for what it really is, and I'm sure I don't have to go into my feelings on that....
Yes, I do find PC Magazine to be **VERY** anti-OS/2, especially some of the
colomnists, but then it's a free world for some of us.
Cheers,
Ian Stickland.
P.S. And this really is an afterthought, shouldn't this be in os2.apps.....byu@csri.toronto.edu (Benjamin Yu) (05/23/91)
In article <9105231120.AA92757@f170.n771.z3.fidonet.org> Steve_Lesner@f261.n141.z1.fidonet.org (Steve Lesner) writes:
#
# I've
# seen the promised land, and in no way, shape or form is it Windows. And yet,
# Windows is all anyone talks about. Why? God only knows. Maybe its a
# conspiracy. But I think a lot of it is mis-interpreted (not really mis-
# quoted) information. So what PC-Mag and other mags need to reflect upon, is
# not what they are writing, but what the hell the users that read it are
# reading out of it! Its called perspective, and PC Mag is telling truths,
# granted, but NOT IN THE PROPER PERSPECTIVES!
#
Well, I was debating whether to develop a piece of software for Windows or
OS/2 PM. I happen to have a development kit for OS/2 PM and the many wonderful
things I have heard about OS/2 2.0 make me want to go the OS/2 route and buy
a copy of OS/2 1.3. Then I wanted to use Adobe Illustrator, Ventura, Word
etc. in a windowing enviornment also, but the problem is none of these are
available in OS/2 PM (may be I am wrong, I hope I am wrong because I still
think OS/2 is a more logical OS than DOS + Windows.) ... and Illustrator only
works in Windows.
So I guess unless OS/2 supports as many applications as Windows, the public
will still favour Windows unfortunately!
--
Benjamin Yu
University of Toronto CSNET, UUCP, BITNET:
Department of Computer Science byu@csri.toronto.edu
Toronto, Ontario Canada M5S 1A4 byu@csri.utoronto.ca
(o)(416)978 - 4299 (h)(416)470 - 8206 {uunet,watmath}!csri.utoronto.edu!byujoeb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Joe Barnhart) (05/24/91)
In comp.os.os2.misc, byu@csri.toronto.edu (Benjamin Yu) writes: | Then I wanted to use Adobe Illustrator, Ventura, Word | etc. Nope. You'll have to use Corel Draw for PM, Microsoft Word for PM, and PageMaker for PM instead. Don't cry too loudly about the lack of software until you search carefully! -- Joe B. #include <standard.disclaimer>
snowden@sequoia.cray.com (Jim Snowden) (05/24/91)
In article <11750011@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> joeb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Joe Barnhart) writes: >In comp.os.os2.misc, byu@csri.toronto.edu (Benjamin Yu) writes: > > | Then I wanted to use Adobe Illustrator, Ventura, Word > | etc. > >Nope. You'll have to use Corel Draw for PM, Microsoft Word for PM, >and PageMaker for PM instead. Don't cry too loudly about the lack of >software until you search carefully! > I've seen adverts for Ventura for OS/2 here in the UK. Jim Snowden, snowden@sequoia.cray.com