Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!njin!princeton!cs!nfs
From: nfs@cs.Princeton.EDU (Norbert Schlenker)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Windows-the interface that may never happen...
Summary: Hardware requirements
Message-ID: <210@rossignol.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 7 Jun 90 15:10:26 GMT
Sender: news@cs.Princeton.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Princeton University
Lines: 48

With all the discussion of how Windows 3.0 will have trouble because
the SDK costs too much, or its incompatibility with previous versions,
or its incompatibility with the OS/2 API, I have yet to see the
following addressed.

I own a Toshiba 5100, which has a 16MHz '386, 2Mb RAM, an EGA card,
and a 40Mb disk.  I drive a multiscanning monitor from the EGA card.
I was never happy with Windows/386 (v2.03) because it wouldn't swap
applications to disk - with only 2Mb of RAM, it just wasn't a useful
program.  I looked forward to Windows 3.0, since it swaps applications
happily.

When my copy of Windows 3.0 arrived from Microsoft (in 3 days rather
than the quoted four weeks!), a quick glance at the manual revealed a
requirement for 6-8Mb of hard disk space.  I freed up some space,
installed the package, and discovered the disk estimates weren't far
off - C:\WINDOWS ate 7.5Mb of my hard disk.  If I want to swap, I need
(probably) another 2-3Mb of disk space.

I don't have it.  I have a hard disk crammed with such useless items
as DOS, an editor, a C compiler, utilities, WordPerfect and fonts,
1-2-3, etc.  You know, the software that people use to get their work
done.  I don't have games on the disk, I don't have 20Mb of GIFs -
there isn't room for that, and if I really want it, well, I'll get it
off a floppy.  If I look at the array of software that I use, the
average package runs to about 2Mb of hard disk space.  I can live with
that.  I do live with that.

But Windows 3.0 doesn't fit that mould.  It is another example of the
software bloat that we have all come to know.  Frankly, I don't know
whether I will install it - I question whether it is worth giving up
10Mb.  I wonder whether others will feel the same way.

Microsoft expects to sell a million copies of Windows 3.0 within a
year.  I expect they will.  I will be surprised if there are a million
users in a year, though, because of the resource requirements.  I
bought 3.0 and I expect that I'll keep it.  But I doubt I'll be using it.

By the magazines, 10Mb is pretty cheap these days.  But disks don't
come in 10Mb chunks any more and space inside a PC is pretty limited
(space inside my T5100 is especially limited ;-).  I wonder how many
will use a package with an apparent cost of $50 (upgrade price) when
they discover they need to lay out another $300-$500 for a hard disk
to keep it on.

Of course, all of you with 330Mb drives have nothing to worry about.

Norbert