Re: If Windows 98 is delayed, we're all in trouble?

["John Robert BEHRMAN" <jbehrman@netropolis.net>]

I agree with Beth.

Win98, like Win95, will not likely sell well as a competitively priced,
stand-alone, retail, off-the-shelf, upgrade product. That is where the money
and technology are: An upgrade release which can be installed
non-destructively on old machines.

But, that is awfully hard to realize, another fatuous GATES objective. I do
not think MS can pull it off, considering everything they are still trying
to lard into poor, old DOS.

How much will people pay to upgrade DOS 6.x/WIN 3.x or DOS 7x/WIN 4.x?

Users will likely get a "negative performance delta". They might get more
stability from better drivers and a logically consistent set of DLLs,
though. Windows installations tend towards DLL Hell and VXD/OCX/OLE
catastrophe, if you install any aftermarket hardware or new software, from
MS or not. Of course, the failure-mode of an upgrade installation is usually
more than frustrating. It is often quite destructive.

Caldera might well have a better approach to the upgrade market with OpenDOS
than MS does. IBM could have sold PCDOS and OS2 all day long, if they had
just sold them as 16-bit client stacks and a 32-bit installable file system,
respectively, with good docs and uniform pricing. But, of course, they never
did.

That leaves MS forcing outfits like Compaq to pre-install Win98 on $400-$800
boxes at what corkage? You know CPQ writes a lot of code and has their own
fine brand. So, what do they need MS for? How much do they need to pay MS
for the privilege of running huge risks by making and selling inexpensive
but hard to maintain computers?

Those are risks a rent-collecting monopolist does not run. So, will CPQ get
slowly ground to pieces in world markets for ever cheaper goods while MS and
RBOCs sell whatever they please at whatever the traffic will bear?

I don't think so.

Most MS costs in developing and deploying Win98 are on making it able to
replace DOS 6x/Win 3.x on a lot of old corporate PCs MS will seek to
upgrade. So, why should CPQ cross subsidize that when they live or die
making new replacement hardware? And, then, how does an outfit like MS which
engages in a battery of monopolistic distribution schemes and discriminatory
pricing figure out how to price and distribute OTC and OEM versions of Win98
to old, old customers like IBM, old machine customers like CPQ or old
booksellers like Ingram, as well new, old customers like DELL, not to
mention virtual and custom computer builders who just assemble machines in
the afternoon from  parts they buy that morning from byte butchers?

The DoJ may be the least of MS problems with Win98. They are getting the to
end of the DOS/WIN kludge/string.

Bye & PLAYON JRBehrman sends.....
-----Original Message-----
From: Beech Family <tobeth@lava.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list AM-INFO <am-info@essential.org>
Date: Tuesday, April 07, 1998 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: If Windows 98 is delayed, we're all in trouble?


>ggaines@generation.net wrote:
>
>>I don't believe it.
>>
>>Personally, I think the growth in the acceptance of the personal
>>computer in home and office has a heck of a lot more going for it
>>than Windows 98.
>>
>>Am I naive?
>>
>>I would like to hear the reasons why "... delayed shipment of
>>Windows 98 ... could disrupt the entire computer industry by
>>causing consumers to delay purchases of new systems."
>>
>>Any takers?
>>
>>Let me hear your reasons.
>
>Well..let's see..they're as much as admitting that Windows 98 is such a
>resource hog that people will be forced to go out and spend gazillions of
>dollars to upgrade *all the hardware* for their huge businesses so they can
>run this fabulous creation efficiently...
>
>Thus enabling the likes of Andy Grove to amass more and more bucks..which
>will undoubtedly "trickle down" to the shoe shine boys at the train station
>or the equivalent.Oh YEAH!!!< shout hallelujah?>
>
>Without the forced expediture of $$$$ by businesses worldwide in order to
>purchase hardware to run another massively bloated bug ridden offering from
>our friends in Redmond..
>
>without the $$ pouring into Disney and Time-Warner, ABC etc. resulting from
>the brainwashing tactics of the "active-desktop" ..
>
>Without the $$$ being spent on books, training, seminars etc. to ensure
>that everyone can use this wonderful "upgrade"..
>
>not to mention paying the "experts" to perform the upgrades and keep the
>thing running...the entire world economy could be jeopardized!!
>
>Heck Gene .. isn't it obvious? ;-)
>
>Heather
>
>