Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:52388 comp.windows.ms:2708
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucsd!sdd.hp.com!apollo!nelson_p
From: nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Windows-the interface that may never happen...
Message-ID: <4af635d5.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
Date: 12 Jun 90 19:16:00 GMT
Sender: root@apollo.HP.COM
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Apollo Division - Chelmsford, MA
Lines: 71




From: wallwey@snoopy.Colorado.EDU (WALLWEY DEAN WILLIAM)
>>
>>  I observed that apps written to run under Windows seem to be
>>  very expensive.  I even cited an example of one app where the
>>  Windows version of the exact same version number was hundred$ 
>>  more than the non-Windows version.
>>
>>  I want to know why this is.  
>
>Please give some more percise examples. 

 Gladly. 

>                       Honestly, alot of Windows aps
>don't cost a lot more than comprible DOS counterparts.  Desktop
>publishing for example---Pagemaker versus Ventura,

 Right, and an Infiniti doesn't cost a lot more than a comparable BMW! 
 So what?   I mentioned in an earlier posting that there are many popular
 DTP packages under $200: Publish-It!, PFS First Publisher, Express Publisher,
 etc..  Ditto with comms packages (Procomm, f'rinstance) or paint packages
 (PC Paintbrush IV+ by Zsoft -- the originator of the popular .pcx file
 format and the Paintbrush app that comes with Windows 3.0 is a badly
 hobbled version of this product ).   How about compilers?   Borland's
 Turbo C and Microsoft's QuickC, for examples. 

 The whole world doesn't drive Mercedes and Infinitis no matter HOW
 good those cars are.  A lot us us drive Escorts and Rabbits.  And a 
 lot of us buy software in the $50-150 price range.  It's not because
 we don't know Ventura is better than First Publisher, but maybe we 
 don't need to publish a book, maybe we just need to turn out a few 
 advertising flyers for the coffeehouse in the church basement.
                        
>  Word for Windows vs Word and Word-Perfect.  Excel vs Lotus 1-2-3
> ver 3.0.  Granted the windows versions cost some more, but
> alot of time, (in my opinion) they are 10 TIMES BETTER!
  
 And BMW makes better cars than Ford, but which do you think will sell
 more?  Not everybody can afford the better product or needs what's 
 better about it. 

> Also remember now that MS Windows 3.0 now comes with some really
> usable small aps itself.  In particular the terminal program,
> PaintBrush program,
 
 I don't find them all that usable.  I need scanner support and
 support for 256 colors, which I get with PC Paintbrush IV+.  I 
 need scripting which I get with Procomm.   But I can't run either of
 the latter under Windows 3.0 (according to MS --I haven't tried myself).

>Also one of the reasons that windows aps tend to be more expensive, is
>that people who run Windows tend to be (I hate the term) 'Power Users'.
>They have 1 Meg or more running on a 286 or better with EGA or better.

 I got news for you:  Hardware has gotten a lot cheaper lately.  I have
 a 386SX with 4 meg of RAM, VGA and a 42 meg H.D. and it cost me a
 little over $2000.   That's not a "power user" price range.  

 Apple has demonstrated that it is possible to create a GUI environment
 which also supports multiple tasks for which software can be developed
 cheaply and relatively easily.    If Windows is hard to program then
 that's because MS designed it that way.   Windows' popularity will
 be very limited as long as the only people who use it are those who 
 can afford to buy the BMW and Mercedes Benz of software products.
                                           
                                                  ---Peter