PSP's Rebuttal to the Microsoft Document: Difference between revisions

From OS2World.Com Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "IBM Personal Software Products PSP's Rebuttal to the Microsoft Document: "Windows NT and OS/2 2.1 : The Advantages of Windows NT for Today's Client Server Computing" May, June, & July 1993 Versions Introduction: The purpose of this document is to rebut any inaccurate and/or misleading information that Microsoft published in a document called "Windows NT and OS/2 2.1: The advantages of Windows NT for Today's Client-Server Computing". Although it is no..."
(No difference)

Revision as of 01:16, 21 July 2022

IBM Personal Software Products

PSP's Rebuttal to the Microsoft Document:

"Windows NT and OS/2 2.1 : The Advantages of Windows NT for Today's Client Server Computing" May, June, & July 1993 Versions

Introduction:

    The purpose of this document is to rebut any inaccurate and/or
 misleading information that Microsoft published in a document
 called "Windows NT and OS/2 2.1: The advantages of Windows NT
 for Today's Client-Server Computing".
    Although it is not IBM's normal practice to produce such a
 rebuttal, we believe our customers should make their decisions
 based on facts, and therefore felt it was worth communicating
 our viewpoint relative to Microsoft's claims and statements
 made in this document. IBM is extremely proud of OS/2 and
 welcomes the opportunity to compare OS/2 to any version of
 Windows Microsoft. We are confident that OS/2 provides a far
 better operating environment than Windows 3.1 and Windows NT,
 and that we will continue to provide superior technology and
 client/server solutions in the years to come. We therefore
 encourage our customers to get the facts when comparing
 OS/2 to Windows and Windows NT.
    There are currently 3 versions of the Microsoft document dated
 May, June, and July 1993.  The June version, in our opinion, did
 not correct any of the problems contained in the May version.
 The July version corrected a few of the problems, due in part to
 our direct contact with Microsoft, but still included the vast
 majority of the problems. Although we have contacted Microsoft
 regarding this document, we do not endorse the July version as
 approved in any way by IBM.  Our rebuttal is intended for
 customers who received the May, June, or July version of the
 referenced Microsoft document.
    To ensure we are direct and to the point in our rebuttal, we
 have organized our response as a series of claims from Microsoft's
 document, in the order of occurrence, followed by our viewpoint.
 The sections are divided by page numbers from the original May
 version of the Microsoft document for easy reference.
    Prior to the item by item discussion, it is worth discussing
 some overall themes that Microsoft consistently uses to distort
 requirements and features truly important to you, our customers,
 who are considering or implementing a mission critical client/
 server application. The most prominent theme Microsoft stresses
 throughout the document is that the client/server functions
 needed for most customers are 'built-in' to Windows NT and
 Windows NT Advanced Server and therefore are integrated. Most of
 the functions, however, were actually previously separate or are
 still separate Microsoft products that are bundled with Windows
 NT e.g.. the LAN server function in Windows NT Advanced Server
 was a port of the Microsoft OS/2 LAN Manager product plus
 enhancements.
    Our customers have told us they want the flexibility to install
 and pay for the right function on the right machine and to be able
 to choose that function from the vendor who is best-of-breed
 (e.g. the ability to choose IBM LAN Server, NetWare from IBM,
 a 3rd party solution, or all of the above based on their
 specific requirements and long term strategies. To assist with
 this customization, we provide solutions such as LAN NetView
 to help customers centrally or remotely automate individual
 and LAN software configuration, installation, and distribution.
 'Built-in' does not mean products are more tightly integrated.
 Both IBM LAN Server 3.0 and NetWare from IBM for OS/2 products,
 for instance, are integrated down to 'ring 0' (privileged kernel
 areas) of the OS/2 operating system. The fact that Microsoft uses
 the word 'built-in' is much more of a marketing and packaging
 statement than it is an integration statement. Another key
 requirement that Microsoft focuses on is reliability.  We agree
 that this is a major requirement for client/server environments.
 We disagree with Microsoft's definition of reliability, which is
 summarized on Microsoft's chart on page 3 as 'Tightly integrated
 security', 'Built-in fault tolerance', 'Integrated systems and
 network management services', and 'Application and system
 integrity'. Removing the words "tightly", "integrated", and
 "built-in", per the discussion above, OS/2 and its family of
 flexible extensions is delivering virtually all of  what Microsoft
 is referring to plus many more important IBM exclusives, and IBM
 PSP has demonstrated or announced products that extend our lead
 as the premier provider of client/server solutions.
    Most important, however, is that customers will view Windows NT
 as reliable when and if it establishes a track record of proven
 reliable operation in production client/server environments.
 Microsoft is claiming that Windows NT, on its first release, with
 over 4 million lines of new code (not including its client server)
 extensions of SQL Server/NT, SNA Server/NT, and Hermes systems
 management) will be more reliable than our 32-bit OS/2 and its
 family of extensions that have been shipping and in production
 use by well over a million customers for over a year. In addition,
 we just shipped the second generation, OS/2 2.1, which has met
 higher quality standards than all previous releases. Although
 Microsoft has done extensive beta testing with a proclaimed
 75,000 users, it is difficult to see how it can compare to the
 over 4 years that OS/2 1.X and 2.0 and its client/server extensions
 have been in actual production use. Reliability to us is what you
 tell us it is - products that work. Reliability is a function of
 proven quality and maturity. Windows NT has yet to prove how
 reliable it is. The Microsoft document also has distorted Windows
 3.0 and Windows 3.1 volumes to emphasize Windows market acceptance.
 There is no dispute that Microsoft has achieved market success with
 the Windows 3.X family, but what is misleading about the document
 is that it uses Windows 3.X volumes when comparing to OS/2's market
 presence but uses Windows NT's features when comparing product lines.
 We have therefore added Windows 3.1 to several of the comparison
 charts Microsoft uses to compare client/server features to show
 that Windows 3.1 fails to meet most of Microsoft's own criteria.
    Given these overall observations we would like to address the
 statements one by one.
 Page 1 (of May version of Microsoft's Document):

Microsoft Claim : "It [OS/2 2.1] does not run Windows applications as well as Windows does."

 IBM Response    :  OS/2 2.1 includes the actual Windows code 3.1 to
                    provide Microsoft Windows 3.1 functionality and
                    compatibility.  OS/2 can also provide Windows
                    applications with key client/server features such
                    as crash-protection and preemptive multitasking
                    by running them in separate Virtual DOS Machines
                    (VDMs). These are features that Microsoft
                    presentations concede will not be supported in
                    Windows NT for 16-bit Windows 3.1 applications.
                    Others agree. According to John Ruley, an editor
                    for Windows Magazine... "OS/2 2.1 is a better DOS
                    than DOS and probably a better Windows than
                    (pause for effect\) Windows..." (June 1993 issue)
 Microsoft Claim  : "Today, OS/2 does not support key Windows features
                    [such] as dynamic data exchange (DDE), object
                    linking and embedding (OLE) and even cut and paste
                    between separate Windows virtual device machines
                    (VDMs)."
 IBM Response     : Not true. OS/2's public clipboard enables DDE and
                    cut and paste to work correctly between Windows
                    applications in separate Windows VDMs (OLE works
                    correctly between applications in the same Windows
                    VDM which is equivalent to Windows NT OLE support).
 Microsoft Claim  : "Windows NT is a more powerful, reliable, and open
                    solution for client-server computing."
 IBM Response     : Windows NT is not yet generally available. While
                    it is certainly designed to be powerful (with a
                    32-bit data model, multithreading and preemptive
                    multitasking like OS/2 has available today), NT's
                    reliability and openness have yet to be proven.
                    Microsoft's justification for this statement
                    references symmetric multiprocessing, portability,
                    openness, integrated security and built-in networking
                    as key high-end OS features.
                       Multi-processor computers may be an option for
                    customers with very high capacity server needs and
                    there are different kinds of multiprocessing
                    architectures to consider. IBM provides asymmetric
                    multiprocessor support for OS/2 on  the PS/2 model
                    295 and 195 today.  Recently, IBM also demonstrated
                    symmetric multiprocessing on OS/2 on a variety of
                    multi-processor systems at Spring '93 Comdex in
                    Atlanta and at PC Expo 1993 in New York.
                       Operating system portability is one alternative
                    for customers who are integrating and supporting
                    different  hardware architectures.  A more important
                    requirement for this environment is for vendors to
                    support open industry standards.  IBM is supporting
                    both of these requirements by supporting OSF's
                    Distributed Computing Environment (DCE) and by
                    providing an OS/2 environment on a portable (to
                    RISC architectures) and open microkernel, via the
                    IBM Microkernel based OS technology which was also
                    demonstrated at Spring Comdex.
                       Microsoft's commitment to Open Systems, especially
                    DCE and CORBA, has been incomplete. We are not alone
                    in this viewpoint. From an article in PC Week, March
                    1993, titled "Microsoft goes it alone: standards
                    stance leaves users concerned", "Users and observers
                    say that Microsoft Corp. is taking advantage of its
                    dominant position as a leader in the microcomputer
                    software market to set its own standards and ignore
                    those set by other industry groups.....Buyers are
                    concerned about interoperability, according to
                    analysts critical of Microsoft's often-proprietary
                    approach.....Microsoft claims that it will support
                    standards that have clear industry-wide support,
                    such as POSIX, TCP/IP, and remote procedure call but
                    has stopped short of endorsing the full Distributed
                    Computing Environment (DCE) standard and some other
                    widely supported standards."
                       Of course, security and networking are necessary
                    requirements for distributed computing. Including
                    these features in the operating system is a packaging
                    and marketing consideration.  It may be a convenience
                    for some customers but it can also limit their options
                    and unnecessarily increase the system requirements.
 Microsoft Claim  : "IBM Has No Single Strategy....Long term IBM is
                    working on eight different operating systems"
 IBM Response     : IBM recognizes that there is no "one size fits all"
                    strategy when it comes to customer computing
                    environments. The number of operating systems offered
                    by IBM is a result of our long term leadership in
                    helping customers develop mission critical systems
                    to meet their needs on a wide variety of hardware
                    platforms. The breadth of IBM offerings is underscored
                    by a singular commitment to serve our customers. On
                    the Intel compatible platform alone, Microsoft has at
                    least eight operating systems supporting their
                    strategy: Windows 3.1, Windows for Workgroups,
                    Windows NT, Windows NT Advanced Server, Chicago,
                    Cairo, Modular Windows and Winpad, all of which have
                    differences in their application programming
                    interfaces (APIs).
                       For a complete discussion of IBM's microcomputer
                    based operating systems strategy, see the related
                    document called "Why OS/2?" (updated version
                    available August 1993).
 Microsoft Claim  : "IBM Embraces Windows"
 IBM Response     : It is true that the IBM PC Company resells Windows and
                    may also pre-load Windows NT when customers request it.
                    IBM recommends OS/2 and its client/server extensions
                    over Windows and Windows NT because it is a superior
                    platform for client-server computing.
 Microsoft Claim  : "Key ISVs, such as Micrografx, are halting their OS/2
                     development efforts...."
 IBM Response     : This statement is incorrect. OS/2 Professional
                    magazine published the following in the May 1993
                    issue: "PC Week recently published an article saying
                    Micrografx was not behind OS/2. On the contrary,
                    J. Paul Grayson, Micrografx CEO, says the company has
                    more people working on OS/2 than ever before, Grayson
                    says Mirrors is doing very well, and they are
                    evaluating new directions for OS/2 products. Among
                    Micrografx's OS/2 offerings are Designer and Windows
                    Draw. Grayson also reportedly attempted to get the
                    PC Week article corrected prior to publication, but
                    was unsuccessful."
 Microsoft Claim  : "...25 Million customers are using Windows already..."
 IBM Response     : While the shipment volumes of Windows is granted,
                    there are several reasons to question the number of
                    actual Windows users.  First, the 25 Million number
                    is the number of shipments since Windows 3.0. Most
                    users of Windows 3.0 have upgraded to OS/2 or
                    Windows 3.1.  Second, 60% of all PCs ship with
                    Windows pre-installed whether the user intends to
                    use it or not.  Last October, Windows Magazine
                    estimated that only 1/3 of all Windows shipments
                    were actually being used.
 Microsoft Claim  : "Windows 3.1 leverages existing hardware and software
                    better."
 IBM Response     : It is a pretty safe assumption that most of the PCs
                    that are running Windows 3.1 are 386 class machines
                    or above with 32-bit architectures. While Windows
                    3.1 runs on more existing machines configurations,
                    it doesn't fully exploit the capabilities of those
                    machines like OS/2 2.X can since Windows 3.1 is a
                    16-bit DOS extender running on 32-bit hardware.
                    In addition, there are more software packages and
                    advanced 32-bit OS/2 applications.
 Microsoft Claim  : "...Usage of OS/2 has dwindled. This is because
                    Windows NT best addresses customer requirements
                    for high-end operating systems."
 IBM Response     : Contrary to Microsoft's claims, usage of OS/2 has
                    not "dwindled".  Shipments of OS/2 2.0 exceed all
                    previous releases of OS/2 combined, and OS/2 2.1
                    has had a very positive reception in the market
                    and is currently shipping in high volumes.
                    [Phrase "Usage of OS/2 has dwindled" was removed
                    from the July version of Microsoft document]
                    The assertion that Windows NT best addresses
                    requirements for high-end operating systems is
                    subjective and unsupported.  A phone survey done
                    by Communications week for their April 19th issues
                    asked the question: "Which operating system is more
                    strategic to your enterprise network: IBM's OS/2 or
                    Microsoft's forthcoming Windows NT?". Over 1,400
                    votes were cast for OS/2 with only 75 cast for NT
                    (95% to 5%).
 The primary correction (besides the inaccuracies about OS/2) is to
 include Windows 3.1, Microsoft's high volume client OS.  As you can
 see, it fails Microsoft's own criteria as a client for client-server
 computing. By these criteria, Microsoft's strategy might be looked
 at as a server-server strategy.
 Microsoft Claim  : "OS/2 2.X only runs on the Intel x86 platform. IBM
                    claims they are porting OS/2 to the Mach kernel,
                    but this means creating an entirely new OS, which
                    is a long and difficult project. For example,
                    Windows NT took over four and one-half years to
                    develop and spent over a year and one-half in
                    large scale external testing."
 IBM Response     : To compare the development of an OS/2 personality to
                    work on top of the IBM microkernel (Mach based) to
                    the development of Windows NT is very misleading.
                    Windows NT was developed from scratch to provide
                    complex, high-end operating systems functions that
                    are not available in the DOS/Windows environment,
                    such as multitasking, multithreading, 32 bit memory
                    model, high performance file system, etc. OS/2
                    already has all these high end features, and we do
                    not have to 'create' an entirely new operating
                    system to move them to a microkernel environment.
                    We also don't need to 'create' the Mach microkernel
                    which is an established code-base developed by
                    Carnegie Melon University, and is adopted, approved
                    and licensed by the Open Software Foundation.
                    Microsoft, on the other hand, decided to build the
                    kernel for NT from scratch (which they admit is a
                    long and difficult project). In doing so, they have
                    also decided to keep their operating system
                    proprietary, not truly open to the industry. IBM,
                    on the other hand, is in the process of licensing
                    our microkernel technology to various industry
                    players.
 Microsoft Claim  : "OS/2 2.X does not support multiprocessor systems"
 IBM Response     : As mentioned earlier, OS/2 currently supports the
                    multiprocessing (asymmetric) PS/2 195 and 295
                    (available today), and OS/2 2.X was demonstrated
                    on a variety of symmetric multiprocessing machines
                    at Spring Comdex 1993 and PC Expo 1993.
 Microsoft Claim  : "[Windows NT] RPC facility is interoperable with
                    other OSF/DCE compatible RPC implementations."
 IBM Response     : While Microsoft claims Windows NT's RPC will be
                    interoperable with DCE there are at least 13 known
                    incompatibilities between it and the DCE RPC as
                    documented in Microsoft's RPC developers guide
                    available with the March 1993 Windows NT beta
                    program. Microsoft's decision to develop their
                    own proprietary code base, instead of licensing
                    it from the Open Software Foundation (OSF),
                    introduces the potential for additional
                    incompatibilities. IBM's implementation of DCE is
                    based on software licensed directly from the OSF.
                    In addition IBM is enhancing the RPC software with
                    plans to license it back to the OSF, meaning
                    Microsoft will always be playing 'catch-up' with
                    the latest OSF RPC specifications. IBM is also
                    licensing software for the other OSF DCE standards
                    which are network time management, security, and
                    distributed directory services (we know of no
                    Microsoft commitment to support these other DCE
                    standards).
 Microsoft Claim  : "OS/2 does not have integration between 16-bit
                    Windows and 32-bit OS/2 applications. In addition,
                    integration features such as OLE and DDE do not
                    work between separate 16-bit Windows VDMs. In many
                    cases, simple cuts and pastes between VDMs do not
                    work properly."
 IBM Response     : As stated earlier, OS/2's public clipboard enables
                    DDE and cut and paste to work correctly between
                    applications in separate Windows VDMs (OLE works
                    correctly between applications in the same Windows
                    VDM which is equivalent to Windows NT OLE support).
                    We also support cut and paste and DDE between
                    Windows and OS/2 applications. [In the July version
                    of the Microsoft document the phrase "OS/2 does not
                    have integration" was changed to "OS/2 has limited
                    integration" with claims that Microsoft internal
                    testing shows complicated cut and pastes and DDEs
                    are not reliable between separate VDM's. Our internal
                    testing and customer feedback indicates that we met
                    our design goal which was to support all cut and
                    pastes and DDEs between Windows applications in
                    separate VDM's that perform correctly under DOS
                    with Windows 3.1].
 Microsoft Claim  : "OS/2 2.x offers no integrated security. IBM promises
                    security add-ons for future releases of OS/2, but to
                    have truly integrated security, it must be designed
                    into the system from the ground up."
 IBM Response     : The requirements for PC security varies from "none
                    at all" for most end-users to "government certified"
                    for military and international banking institutions.
                    Microsoft is correct that some high-security features
                    should be included in the base operating system.
                    However, Microsoft's implication that OS/2 needs to
                    be redesigned from the ground up is subjective and
                    unsupported by facts.  We have made design changes
                    in OS/2 to enhance security over the years,
                    specifically in support for OS/2 LAN Server which is
                    the current method of providing fundamental security
                    on an OS/2 system. We have plans in place to improve
                    OS/2's security further and demonstrated a technology
                    enhancing OS/2's security at Fall 1992 Comdex.
 Microsoft Claim  : "This [NT's] complete memory protection prevents
                    errant applications from corrupting data, interfering
                    with other applications, or damaging the system."
 IBM Response     : This is not correct. Because NT runs all 16-bit
                    Windows applications in a single address space, it is
                    possible for one of these applications to interfere
                    with one of the others running in that same space.
                    This can happen between 16-bit Windows applications
                    under Windows 3.0 and 3.1 in the form of UAEs and GPFs,
                    respectively, and can continue to happen under Windows
                    NT.
 Microsoft Claim  : "IBM claims that Windows 3.x applications are better
                    protected in OS/2, but this is not the default
                    configuration and can't be enabled without sacrificing
                    application integration."
 IBM Response     : By "sacrificing integration" Microsoft is again
                    implying that cut and paste and DDE don't work
                    across VDMs. Again, OS/2's public clipboard enables
                    DDE and cut and paste to work correctly between
                    applications in separate Windows VDMs (OLE works
                    correctly between applications in the same Windows
                    VDM which is equivalent to Windows NT OLE support).
 Microsoft Claim  : "LAN Server does not support RAID 5."
 IBM Response     : This is misleading. LAN Server does not provide
                    RAID 5 natively, but IBM offers an add-on product
                    called OASAS that provides RAID 5 with or without
                    LAN Server installed.
 Microsoft Claim  : "25% of [NT] applications are being ported from
                    UNIX, VMS and MVS, including IBM's own DB2
                    database."
 IBM Response     : This is a very misleading statement. IBM's MVS DB2
                    database is not being ported to Windows NT. In an
                    effort to support a wide variety of server platforms,
                    the DB2/2 product (currently available for the OS/2
                    environment) is being considered for porting to
                    additional operating environments.
 Microsoft Claim  : "IBM currently lists only 500 unique OS/2 applications."
 IBM Response     : This statement is incorrect. IBM currently lists
                    1196 unique OS/2 32-bit exploitive applications in
                    our OS/2 Applications Guide. In addition OS/2 2.1
                    runs existing DOS and Windows 3.X applications.
 Microsoft Claim  : "IBM's Strategy...[is to] .. Show that Windows NT
                    is broken"
 IBM Response     : This is not correct. IBM does not believe that
                    Windows NT is broken. It is late, still unavailable
                    and definitely unproven. We do, however, believe
                    that Microsoft's client server strategy and products
                    are not as good as ours, as we offer a more reliable,
                    comprehensive and available set of client server
                    solutions.
 Microsoft Claim  : "OS/2 does not have the mission-critical features of
                    Windows NT today."
 IBM Response     : Today, OS/2 has more mission critical features
                    available than Windows 3.1 and NT. When NT does
                    become generally available, it is planned to have
                    some additional features that are specific to
                    niche needs. These features are either available on
                    OS/2 via add-ons (such as fault tolerance and RAID 5)
                    or are planned for OS/2 or a future add-on. On the
                    other hand, even after NT is generally available,
                    Windows 3.1 will still have inadequate mission
                    critical features for the client such as pre-emptive
                    multitasking and crash protection, which OS/2 has
                    today.
 Microsoft Claim  : "Today, OS/2 is missing key mission-critical features
                    customers require, including true preemptive
                    multitasking (with asynchronous input queues...)."
 IBM Response     : This is a very misleading statement. OS/2 has true
                    preemptive multitasking (i.e. the system can interrupt,
                    or preempt,  a running task and give control to another
                    task). Asynchronous input queues address a different
                    aspect of the system.  An asynchronous input queue
                    gives a separate keyboard and mouse channel for each
                    application running on the screen.  This feature does
                    make the system feel more responsive to the end user,
                    but has no value on an unattended server, which is
                    Windows NT's main target area market. IBM has publicly
                    stated that asynchronous input queue support for OS/2
                    is in development. Also note that 16-bit Windows
                    applications running under Windows 3.1  under
                    Windows NT are lacking both features (preemptive
                    multitasking and asynchronous input queues).
 Microsoft Claim  : "IBM has promised these features and others that
                    Windows NT has today for the future, but equivalent
                    functionality is still one to three years out"
 IBM Response     : Windows NT is not generally available today, and
                    Microsoft 's statements do not reflect IBM's
                    priorities or product plans.  OS/2 has a 15 month
                    lead as an available 32-bit operating system and
                    has features Microsoft does not plan to ship in
                    Windows NT 3.1 such as an object-oriented Workplace
                    Shell user interface and our System Object Model (SOM)
                    which incorporates object technology directly into
                    the operating system to allow object reuse between
                    different object languages. In addition we have
                    announced for 3rd quarter '93 delivery and are beta
                    testing Distributed SOM (DSOM) which allows object
                    communication and reuse over networks, between
                    different languages, and potentially even different
                    operating systems (e.g. AIX and OS/2). In addition,
                    IBM has recently stated its intent to use OpenDoc
                    technology from Apple for compound document
                    integration that will support SOM and DSOM providing
                    application integration across multiple operating
                    systems, including UNIX, and across networks (both of
                    which are features that are lacking in OLE 2.0 from
                    Microsoft). OpenDoc is vendor independent and has
                    growing industry support from major players including
                    IBM, Apple, Novell, WordPerfect and Borland.
                    [In the July version of the Microsoft document the
                    phrase "but equivalent functionality is still one to
                    three years out" was changed to "but can't deliver
                    them today". The 'functionality' Microsoft refers to
                    includes 'built-in systems management tools' (Hermes)
                    which is not available from Microsoft today. IBM's LAN
                    NetView family of systems management products all
                    entered beta testing with customers in June 1993
                    and LAN NetView Start is generally available.
 Microsoft Claim  : "Windows NT is compatible with Windows 16-bit and
                    MS-DOS applications."
 IBM Response     : We believe NT will be compatible with the high volume
                    applications but Microsoft will not focus on
                    compatibility for lower volume or home grown
                    applications.  Also, DOS and Windows applications
                    that ship with and use a DOS device driver will not
                    run under NT without modification unless a new device
                    driver is supplied (per a presentation from Microsoft
                    called "A Technical Overview of Microsoft Window
                    NT 3.1.").
 Microsoft Claim  : "Windows NT's 16-bit application protection model
                    provides error trapping between applications and
                    more importantly provides full integration between
                    applications. OS/2's model breaks application
                    integration."
 IBM Response     : The error trapping mechanism in Windows 3.1
                    (and NT) for 16-bit applications is not the
                    same thing as the true protection that OS/2
                    provides for all applications by running them
                    under separate processes. Error trapping just
                    notifies the user once the damage has been done
                    and recommends the user reboots (Windows 3.1) or
                    restarts the Windows subsystem (Windows NT).
                    Also, as stated earlier, Microsoft is incorrect
                    about OS/2's ability to support DDE and cut and
                    paste between Windows applications in separate
                    VDMs and OLE works correctly between applications
                    in the same Windows VDM which is equivalent to
                    Windows NT OLE support. Also IBM has announced
                    our intention to support OpenDoc, which will
                    provide compound document integration across
                    multiple operating system types, including UNIX,
                    and over networks which are features that OLE 2.0
                    does not support.
 Microsoft Claim : "Neither OS/2 or Windows NT run on [Intel 386 systems
                    with 4Mb of RAM]."
 IBM Response    : This is incorrect. OS/2 does run on 4Mb Intel 386
                   systems (although 6 to 8Mb are recommended.)
                   Windows NT does not.
 Microsoft Claim : "OS/2's model forces customers to choose between
                   integration or task switching with protection."
 IBM Response    : Microsoft is again implying that cut and paste and
                   DDE do not work between separate Windows VDMs in
                   OS/2. With the public clipboard enabled, DDE and
                   cut and paste work correctly between applications
                   in separate Windows VDMs (OLE works correctly
                   between applications in the same Windows VDM which
                   is equivalent to Windows NT OLE support).
 Microsoft Claim : "IBM Asserts: OS/2 2.1 runs Windows applications
                   faster than Windows NT on identical hardware....
                   Windows NT performance is equivalent to OS/2 2.1"
 IBM Response    : Some independent performance tests on Windows NT and
                   OS/2 have been described on public bulletin boards
                   that have drawn the conclusion that DOS and Windows
                   applications run faster on OS/2 than on Windows NT,
                   however IBM hasn't and won't "assert" anything
                   officially until the Windows NT code is made
                   generally available. [July version of the Microsoft
                   document changes this claim to "Windows NT performance,
                   given a certain level of hardware (e.g. Windows NT
                   does not support 6 MB RAM configurations) is equivalent
                   to OS/2 2.1"].
 Microsoft Claim : "Windows NT is better optimized for performance-critical
                   applications."
 IBM Response    : The three reasons listed are the implementation of
                   asynchronous input queues, use of asynchronous I/O,
                   and the ability to preempt a running time slice.
                   OS/2 supports the last two features today and have
                   publicly stated we intend to support asynchronous
                   input queues in a future release. Asynchronous
                   input queues affect only the responsiveness of the
                   client and not of an unattended server. Also, as
                   stated above, some independent performance tests
                   have indicated that OS/2 is probably a better choice
                   if performance is a concern, although we plan to wait
                   for NT to ship to draw that conclusion.
 Microsoft Claim : ".... in IBM's OS/2 applications catalog, only 500
                   are unique, of which only 15 are general desktop
                   applications."
 IBM Response    : This statement is incorrect. IBM currently lists
                   1196 unique OS/2 32-bit exploitive applications in
                   our OS/2 Applications Guide.
 Microsoft Claim : "Microsoft has met every development milestone with
                    Windows NT and plans to deliver it as promised in
                    Q2 1993."
 IBM Response    : The following would seem to suggest otherwise:
                   MacWeek, July 13th 1992: "NT (New Technology) is on
                   track to ship by the end of the year [1992] and is
                   expected to cost less than $500, Gates said"
                   Computer Reseller News, September 28th, 1992: "Walker
                   says that Windows NT will ship during the first few
                   months of 1993."
                   Newsbytes, September 28th, 1992: "The new date is now
                   'early 1993,' with Microsoft officials saying that
                   it 'needs more time to respond to customer suggestions
                   for improvements in the Windows NT system'."
                   Software Magazine, December 1992: "At the ITAA
                   conference...Mike Maples, Microsoft's executive vice
                   president, said NT would ship in April."
                   InfoWorld, March 15th, 1993: "NT could ship to
                   customers later than the promised date of June 30,
                   but no more than 30 days late, Walker said."
                   Windows World Spring 1993: Gates said in his keynote
                   Windows NT would ship within 60 days [by July 22nd]
                   and that Windows NT Advanced Server would ship within
                   30 days of Windows NT [by August 21st].
                   PCWeek, July 5th, 1993: "Gates also said Microsoft
                   will ship Windows NT by the end of the month [July]...".
                   [In the July version of the Microsoft document, this
                   claim was removed].
 Microsoft Claim : "OS/2 requires add-on products (costly products) ...
                   and they are not well integrated with OS/2."
 IBM Response    : Maintaining only the necessary functions on desktop
                   machines is a significant benefit of Client-Server
                   systems and it is what "Rightsizing" is all about.
                   Unnecessarily upgrading hardware and forcing unused
                   functionality into every machine is what can be costly.
                   Our customers have told us that they need flexibility...
                   so we are providing a robust and stable base for both
                   client and server systems with optionally available
                   features to customize each system as necessary. We
                   also provide LAN mechanisms to manage this process
                   centrally via remote electronic software configuration,
                   installation and distribution. Microsoft's assertion
                   that networking features need to be built-in to be
                   well integrated is simply not true.
                   [In the July version of the Microsoft document, the
                   "(costly products)" phrase was removed]
 Microsoft Claim : "By using the Windows NT microkernel architecture
                   model, IBM claims OS/2 will..."
 IBM Response    : The IBM Microkernel is based on the Mach 3.0
                   architecture, not the Windows NT architecture model.
                   IBM has since made significant enhancements to this
                   microkernel and are now in the process of licensing
                   this technology to other vendors making it an open
                   architecture.  Windows NT's kernel technology is not
                   considered a true microkernel since device driver and
                   file system functions were allowed to reside in the
                   kernel itself. Windows NT's kernel is also proprietary.
                   [In the July version of the Microsoft document the phase
                   "By using the Windows NT microkernel architecture model"
                   was changed to "By using the Mach microkernel architecture
                   model"].
 Microsoft Claim : "IBM's development cycle is one to three years behind
                    Microsoft's.  Windows NT will have been on the market
                    for several years before IBM ships its first microkernel
                    based version of OS/2."
 IBM Response     : In the paragraph preceding this statement, Microsoft
                    also states that IBM plans to have microkernel based
                    version of OS/2 available by mid-1994. Putting these
                    two statements together implies that Windows NT has
                    been "on the market" for several years before mid-1994.
                    Obviously, IBM is not behind Microsoft in any sense.
                    OS/2 is at least 15 months ahead of Windows NT in
                    making mission-critical features available to customers.
                    IBM is also years ahead of Microsoft in object
                    technology - we shipped an object-oriented operating
                    system shell called Workplace Shell with OS/2 2.0 in
                    March of 1992 and have delivered beta versions of our
                    Distributed Systems Object Model in February 1993.
                    On June 15th 1993, IBM announced the SOMobjects
                    Developer Tool kit Version 2.0, the first professional
                    programming tool kit to incorporate IBM's System Object
                    Model (SOM) and Distributed System Object Model (DSOM)
                    technologies and announced a scheduled availability
                    data of  3Q '93.  Microsoft doesn't plan to deliver
                    an object oriented interface or support distributed
                    objects on Windows NT until release 2 (Cairo).
                    Microsoft has made no formal commitment for these
                    object features on Windows 4.0 (Chicago) that IBM is
                    aware of.
                    [In the July version of the Microsoft document, the
                    claim above was changed to "IBM PSP group plans to
                    ship a full beta release of its first microkernel-
                    based version of OS/2 by the end of the 1993...].
 For more information on the competitive advantages of OS/2 2.1 in a
 client server environment, please read Why OS/2? (updated version
 available August 1993), which can be obtained from your IBM marketing
 representative or systems engineer.
 Disclaimer
    Some of the information in this paper concerns future products, or
 future releases of current, commercially available products. Discussion
 of Windows is based on information which the Microsoft Corporation has
 made publicly available as of June 28th 1993,  or information in the
 public trade press, and is subject to change. IBM's future products
 and their performance, functions and availability are based upon IBM's
 current intent, and are subject to change.
 Special Notices
    References in this publication to IBM's current and future products,
 programs or services do not imply that IBM intends to make these
 generally available in all countries in which IBM operates. IBM may
 have patents or pending patent applications covering subject matter
 in this document. This document does not grant anyone a license to
 those patents, patent applications or to any other IBM intellectual
 property. IBM and OS/2 are registered trademarks and NetView and
 SOMobjects are trademarks of the IBM Corporation. Microsoft is a
 registered trademark and Windows and Windows NT are trademarks of
 Microsoft Corporation. NetWare is a registered trademark of Novell.
 UNIX is a registered trademark of UNIX Systems Laboratory.