Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rpi!barryf From: barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 is here! vs Windows 3.0 vs NeXT/MACH Message-ID: Date: 8 May 91 15:51:53 GMT References: <1991May6.171205.9611@watson.ibm.com> <-47gvh+@rpi.edu> <1508@h.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu> Lines: 62 Nntp-Posting-Host: aix01srv.aix.rpi.edu Imara (sp?) may be one such application that uniquely benefits from OS/2's advance multitasking and file system. Undoubtedly others will follow and as they do, history repeating itself, so too will buyers of these app's and the underlying operating system. Developers more than anyone will initially benefit from OS/2's technical advances, given OS/2 application development tools that also take similar advantage. Despite unfortunate timing and many delays, Win 3.0 undeniably offers advances (enabling technologies) otherwise not available in a DOS world. The graphical interface not least of which, clipboard, DDE, fonts, etc. in an integrated environment. These features are all but useless to the average user, in and of themselves. PageMaker and Excel and Word (among hundreds of others) are uniquely suited to a GUI, and the related technical advances, over DOS. Hence, my interest in moving from DOS applications to Win 3.0 applications. The user interface is at least 10-30% similar between functionally disimilar applications. Few DOS app's offer on-screen fonts, etc. The same may be said for those still using DOS and thinking of making a transition to OS/2. These individuals will have acess to enabling technology more advanced (on paper and eventually in practice) than Win 3.0. Given the limitations of an unadorned DOS environment there will be few compelling reasons to remain there, except familiarity (like an old blanket that's torn, and worn). The tougher market to crack, IMHO, entails the installed base of Win 3.0 systems. Besides "Imara" (sp?), maybe, I am not compelled to shift, yet. When I do shift from Win 3.0, it is currently not clear whether it will be to OS/2 (unlikely at this time) or Unix (preferrably Mach on the NeXT). As previously stated, I suspect the shift will occur when compelling applications are available which meet as yet undefined needs. Current needs are being met (more than adequately) by Win 3.0 on 386's. Tighter integration of functions (a la objects) may be the compelling force for me. NeXT provides a peek at the potential. "Applets" linked together to meet needs seem to be the wave of the future (e.g. NeXT's e-mail system of attaching objects to a message, including voice notes, graphics, text, animation, etc.). Vanilla Unix and OS/2 are simply not as exciting. This is not to say that thay won't meet many needs. Instead of asking for "killer app's", it may be more accurate to say that they are not clearly defining new "needs", NeXT a la Jobs is skilled in this area (foresight, imagination, etc. vs. incremental performance advances). Neural nets are another enabling technology that is slowly making its way into everyday computing. The person or company that takes advantage of this technology in an exciting way, defining new needs, will undoubtedly launch a whole new realm of debate over systems (can you say NNeXT?). Is this clearer? end 'o ramblin... barry -- +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Barry B. Floyd \\\ barry_floyd@mts.rpi.edu | | Manager Information Systems - HR \\\ usere9w9@rpitsmts | +-Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute--------------------troy, ny 12180-+