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..."
 
Jugbogdan (talk | contribs)
mNo edit summary
Line 7: Line 7:
Introduction:
Introduction:


    The purpose of this document is to rebut any inaccurate and/or
The purpose of this document is to rebut any inaccurate and/or
  misleading information that Microsoft published in a document
misleading information that Microsoft published in a document
  called "Windows NT and OS/2 2.1: The advantages of Windows NT
called "Windows NT and OS/2 2.1: The advantages of Windows NT
  for Today's Client-Server Computing".
for Today's Client-Server Computing".


    Although it is not IBM's normal practice to produce such a
Although it is not IBM's normal practice to produce such a
  rebuttal, we believe our customers should make their decisions
rebuttal, we believe our customers should make their decisions
  based on facts, and therefore felt it was worth communicating
based on facts, and therefore felt it was worth communicating
  our viewpoint relative to Microsoft's claims and statements
our viewpoint relative to Microsoft's claims and statements
  made in this document. IBM is extremely proud of OS/2 and
made in this document. IBM is extremely proud of OS/2 and
  welcomes the opportunity to compare OS/2 to any version of
welcomes the opportunity to compare OS/2 to any version of
  Windows Microsoft. We are confident that OS/2 provides a far
Windows Microsoft. We are confident that OS/2 provides a far
  better operating environment than Windows 3.1 and Windows NT,
better operating environment than Windows 3.1 and Windows NT,
  and that we will continue to provide superior technology and
and that we will continue to provide superior technology and
  client/server solutions in the years to come. We therefore
client/server solutions in the years to come. We therefore
  encourage our customers to get the facts when comparing
encourage our customers to get the facts when comparing
  OS/2 to Windows and Windows NT.
OS/2 to Windows and Windows NT.


    There are currently 3 versions of the Microsoft document dated
There are currently 3 versions of the Microsoft document dated
  May, June, and July 1993.  The June version, in our opinion, did
May, June, and July 1993.  The June version, in our opinion, did
  not correct any of the problems contained in the May version.
not correct any of the problems contained in the May version.
  The July version corrected a few of the problems, due in part to
The July version corrected a few of the problems, due in part to
  our direct contact with Microsoft, but still included the vast
our direct contact with Microsoft, but still included the vast
  majority of the problems. Although we have contacted Microsoft
majority of the problems. Although we have contacted Microsoft
  regarding this document, we do not endorse the July version as
regarding this document, we do not endorse the July version as
  approved in any way by IBM.  Our rebuttal is intended for
approved in any way by IBM.  Our rebuttal is intended for
  customers who received the May, June, or July version of the
customers who received the May, June, or July version of the
  referenced Microsoft document.
referenced Microsoft document.


    To ensure we are direct and to the point in our rebuttal, we
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
have organized our response as a series of claims from Microsoft's
  document, in the order of occurrence, followed by our viewpoint.
document, in the order of occurrence, followed by our viewpoint.
  The sections are divided by page numbers from the original May
The sections are divided by page numbers from the original May
  version of the Microsoft document for easy reference.
version of the Microsoft document for easy reference.


    Prior to the item by item discussion, it is worth discussing
Prior to the item by item discussion, it is worth discussing
  some overall themes that Microsoft consistently uses to distort
some overall themes that Microsoft consistently uses to distort
  requirements and features truly important to you, our customers,
requirements and features truly important to you, our customers,
  who are considering or implementing a mission critical client/
who are considering or implementing a mission critical client/
  server application. The most prominent theme Microsoft stresses
server application. The most prominent theme Microsoft stresses
  throughout the document is that the client/server functions
throughout the document is that the client/server functions
  needed for most customers are 'built-in' to Windows NT and
needed for most customers are 'built-in' to Windows NT and
  Windows NT Advanced Server and therefore are integrated. Most of
Windows NT Advanced Server and therefore are integrated. Most of
  the functions, however, were actually previously separate or are
the functions, however, were actually previously separate or are
  still separate Microsoft products that are bundled with Windows
still separate Microsoft products that are bundled with Windows
  NT e.g.. the LAN server function in Windows NT Advanced Server
NT e.g.. the LAN server function in Windows NT Advanced Server
  was a port of the Microsoft OS/2 LAN Manager product plus
was a port of the Microsoft OS/2 LAN Manager product plus enhancements.
  enhancements.


    Our customers have told us they want the flexibility to install
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
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
to choose that function from the vendor who is best-of-breed
  (e.g. the ability to choose IBM LAN Server, NetWare from IBM,
(e.g. the ability to choose IBM LAN Server, NetWare from IBM,
  a 3rd party solution, or all of the above based on their
a 3rd party solution, or all of the above based on their
  specific requirements and long term strategies. To assist with
specific requirements and long term strategies. To assist with
  this customization, we provide solutions such as LAN NetView
this customization, we provide solutions such as LAN NetView
  to help customers centrally or remotely automate individual
to help customers centrally or remotely automate individual
  and LAN software configuration, installation, and distribution.
and LAN software configuration, installation, and distribution.
  'Built-in' does not mean products are more tightly integrated.
'Built-in' does not mean products are more tightly integrated.
  Both IBM LAN Server 3.0 and NetWare from IBM for OS/2 products,
Both IBM LAN Server 3.0 and NetWare from IBM for OS/2 products,
  for instance, are integrated down to 'ring 0' (privileged kernel
for instance, are integrated down to 'ring 0' (privileged kernel
  areas) of the OS/2 operating system. The fact that Microsoft uses
areas) of the OS/2 operating system. The fact that Microsoft uses
  the word 'built-in' is much more of a marketing and packaging
the word 'built-in' is much more of a marketing and packaging
  statement than it is an integration statement. Another key
statement than it is an integration statement. Another key
  requirement that Microsoft focuses on is reliability.  We agree
requirement that Microsoft focuses on is reliability.  We agree
  that this is a major requirement for client/server environments.
that this is a major requirement for client/server environments.
  We disagree with Microsoft's definition of reliability, which is
We disagree with Microsoft's definition of reliability, which is
  summarized on Microsoft's chart on page 3 as 'Tightly integrated
summarized on Microsoft's chart on page 3 as 'Tightly integrated
  security', 'Built-in fault tolerance', 'Integrated systems and
security', 'Built-in fault tolerance', 'Integrated systems and
  network management services', and 'Application and system
network management services', and 'Application and system
  integrity'. Removing the words "tightly", "integrated", and
integrity'. Removing the words "tightly", "integrated", and
  "built-in", per the discussion above, OS/2 and its family of
"built-in", per the discussion above, OS/2 and its family of
  flexible extensions is delivering virtually all of  what Microsoft
flexible extensions is delivering virtually all of  what Microsoft
  is referring to plus many more important IBM exclusives, and IBM
is referring to plus many more important IBM exclusives, and IBM
  PSP has demonstrated or announced products that extend our lead
PSP has demonstrated or announced products that extend our lead
  as the premier provider of client/server solutions.
as the premier provider of client/server solutions.


    Most important, however, is that customers will view Windows NT
Most important, however, is that customers will view Windows NT
  as reliable when and if it establishes a track record of proven
as reliable when and if it establishes a track record of proven
  reliable operation in production client/server environments.
reliable operation in production client/server environments.
  Microsoft is claiming that Windows NT, on its first release, with
Microsoft is claiming that Windows NT, on its first release, with
  over 4 million lines of new code (not including its client server)
over 4 million lines of new code (not including its client server)
  extensions of SQL Server/NT, SNA Server/NT, and Hermes systems
extensions of SQL Server/NT, SNA Server/NT, and Hermes systems
  management) will be more reliable than our 32-bit OS/2 and its
management) will be more reliable than our 32-bit OS/2 and its
  family of extensions that have been shipping and in production
family of extensions that have been shipping and in production
  use by well over a million customers for over a year. In addition,
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
we just shipped the second generation, OS/2 2.1, which has met
  higher quality standards than all previous releases. Although
higher quality standards than all previous releases. Although
  Microsoft has done extensive beta testing with a proclaimed
Microsoft has done extensive beta testing with a proclaimed
  75,000 users, it is difficult to see how it can compare to the
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
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
have been in actual production use. Reliability to us is what you
  tell us it is - products that work. Reliability is a function of
tell us it is - products that work. Reliability is a function of
  proven quality and maturity. Windows NT has yet to prove how
proven quality and maturity. Windows NT has yet to prove how
  reliable it is. The Microsoft document also has distorted Windows
reliable it is. The Microsoft document also has distorted Windows
  3.0 and Windows 3.1 volumes to emphasize Windows market acceptance.
3.0 and Windows 3.1 volumes to emphasize Windows market acceptance.
  There is no dispute that Microsoft has achieved market success with
There is no dispute that Microsoft has achieved market success with
  the Windows 3.X family, but what is misleading about the document
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
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.
presence but uses Windows NT's features when comparing product lines.
  We have therefore added Windows 3.1 to several of the comparison
We have therefore added Windows 3.1 to several of the comparison
  charts Microsoft uses to compare client/server features to show
charts Microsoft uses to compare client/server features to show
  that Windows 3.1 fails to meet most of Microsoft's own criteria.
that Windows 3.1 fails to meet most of Microsoft's own criteria.


    Given these overall observations we would like to address the
Given these overall observations we would like to address the
  statements one by one.
statements one by one.


  Page 1 (of May version of Microsoft's Document):
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."
;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)


  IBM Response    : OS/2 2.1 includes the actual Windows code 3.1 to
;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)."
                    provide Microsoft Windows 3.1 functionality and
;IBM Response:
                    compatibility.  OS/2 can also provide Windows
Not true. OS/2's public clipboard enables DDE and
                    applications with key client/server features such
cut and paste to work correctly between Windows
                    as crash-protection and preemptive multitasking
applications in separate Windows VDMs (OLE works
                    by running them in separate Virtual DOS Machines
correctly between applications in the same Windows
                    (VDMs). These are features that Microsoft
VDM which is equivalent to Windows NT OLE support).
                    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
;Microsoft Claim: "Windows NT is a more powerful, reliable, and open solution for client-server computing."
                    [such] as dynamic data exchange (DDE), object
;IBM Response:
                    linking and embedding (OLE) and even cut and paste
Windows NT is not yet generally available. While
                    between separate Windows virtual device machines
it is certainly designed to be powerful (with a
                    (VDMs)."
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.


  IBM Response    : Not true. OS/2's public clipboard enables DDE and
Multi-processor computers may be an option for
                    cut and paste to work correctly between Windows
customers with very high capacity server needs and
                    applications in separate Windows VDMs (OLE works
there are different kinds of multiprocessing
                    correctly between applications in the same Windows
architectures to consider. IBM provides asymmetric
                    VDM which is equivalent to Windows NT OLE support).
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.


  Microsoft Claim : "Windows NT is a more powerful, reliable, and open
Operating system portability is one alternative
                    solution for client-server computing."
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.


  IBM Response    : Windows NT is not yet generally available. While
Microsoft's commitment to Open Systems, especially
                    it is certainly designed to be powerful (with a
DCE and CORBA, has been incomplete. We are not alone
                    32-bit data model, multithreading and preemptive
in this viewpoint. From an article in PC Week, March
                    multitasking like OS/2 has available today), NT's
1993, titled "Microsoft goes it alone: standards
                    reliability and openness have yet to be proven.
stance leaves users concerned", "Users and observers
                    Microsoft's justification for this statement
say that Microsoft Corp. is taking advantage of its
                    references symmetric multiprocessing, portability,
dominant position as a leader in the microcomputer
                    openness, integrated security and built-in networking
software market to set its own standards and ignore
                    as key high-end OS features.
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."


                        Multi-processor computers may be an option for
Of course, security and networking are necessary
                    customers with very high capacity server needs and
requirements for distributed computing. Including
                    there are different kinds of multiprocessing
these features in the operating system is a packaging
                    architectures to consider. IBM provides asymmetric
and marketing considerationIt may be a convenience
                    multiprocessor support for OS/2 on  the PS/2 model
for some customers but it can also limit their options
                    295 and 195 todayRecently, IBM also demonstrated
and unnecessarily increase the system requirements.
                    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
;Microsoft Claim: "IBM Has No Single Strategy....Long term IBM is working on eight different operating systems"
                    for customers who are integrating and supporting
;IBM Response:
                    different  hardware architectures. A more important
IBM recognizes that there is no "one size fits all"
                    requirement for this environment is for vendors to
strategy when it comes to customer computing
                    support open industry standards. IBM is supporting
environments. The number of operating systems offered
                    both of these requirements by supporting OSF's
by IBM is a result of our long term leadership in
                    Distributed Computing Environment (DCE) and by
helping customers develop mission critical systems
                    providing an OS/2 environment on a portable (to
to meet their needs on a wide variety of hardware
                    RISC architectures) and open microkernel, via the
platforms. The breadth of IBM offerings is underscored
                    IBM Microkernel based OS technology which was also
by a singular commitment to serve our customers. On
                    demonstrated at Spring Comdex.
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).


                        Microsoft's commitment to Open Systems, especially
For a complete discussion of IBM's microcomputer
                    DCE and CORBA, has been incomplete. We are not alone
based operating systems strategy, see the related
                    in this viewpoint. From an article in PC Week, March
document called "Why OS/2?" (updated version
                    1993, titled "Microsoft goes it alone: standards
available August 1993).
                    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
;Microsoft Claim: "IBM Embraces Windows"
                    requirements for distributed computing. Including
;IBM Response:
                    these features in the operating system is a packaging
It is true that the IBM PC Company resells Windows and
                    and marketing consideration.  It may be a convenience
may also pre-load Windows NT when customers request it.
                    for some customers but it can also limit their options
IBM recommends OS/2 and its client/server extensions
                    and unnecessarily increase the system requirements.
over Windows and Windows NT because it is a superior
platform for client-server computing.


  Microsoft Claim : "IBM Has No Single Strategy....Long term IBM is
;Microsoft Claim: "Key ISVs, such as Micrografx, are halting their OS/2 development efforts...."
                    working on eight different operating systems"
;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."


  IBM Response     : IBM recognizes that there is no "one size fits all"
;Microsoft Claim: "...25 Million customers are using Windows already..."
                    strategy when it comes to customer computing
;IBM Response:
                    environments. The number of operating systems offered
While the shipment volumes of Windows is granted,
                    by IBM is a result of our long term leadership in
there are several reasons to question the number of
                    helping customers develop mission critical systems
actual Windows users. First, the 25 Million number
                    to meet their needs on a wide variety of hardware
is the number of shipments since Windows 3.0. Most
                    platforms. The breadth of IBM offerings is underscored
users of Windows 3.0 have upgraded to OS/2 or
                    by a singular commitment to serve our customers. On
Windows 3.1.  Second, 60% of all PCs ship with
                    the Intel compatible platform alone, Microsoft has at
Windows pre-installed whether the user intends to
                    least eight operating systems supporting their
use it or not.  Last October, Windows Magazine
                    strategy: Windows 3.1, Windows for Workgroups,
estimated that only 1/3 of all Windows shipments
                    Windows NT, Windows NT Advanced Server, Chicago,
were actually being used.
                    Cairo, Modular Windows and Winpad, all of which have
                    differences in their application programming
                    interfaces (APIs).


                        For a complete discussion of IBM's microcomputer
;Microsoft Claim: "Windows 3.1 leverages existing hardware and software better."
                    based operating systems strategy, see the related
;IBM Response:
                    document called "Why OS/2?" (updated version
It is a pretty safe assumption that most of the PCs
                    available August 1993).
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 : "IBM Embraces Windows"
;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]


  IBM Response    : It is true that the IBM PC Company resells Windows and
The assertion that Windows NT best addresses
                    may also pre-load Windows NT when customers request it.
requirements for high-end operating systems is
                    IBM recommends OS/2 and its client/server extensions
subjective and unsupported. A phone survey done
                    over Windows and Windows NT because it is a superior
by Communications week for their April 19th issues
                    platform for client-server computing.
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%).


  Microsoft Claim  : "Key ISVs, such as Micrografx, are halting their OS/2
The primary correction (besides the inaccuracies about OS/2) is to
                      development efforts...."
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.


  IBM Response    : This statement is incorrect. OS/2 Professional
;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."
                    magazine published the following in the May 1993
;IBM Response:
                    issue: "PC Week recently published an article saying
To compare the development of an OS/2 personality to
                    Micrografx was not behind OS/2. On the contrary,
work on top of the IBM microkernel (Mach based) to
                    J. Paul Grayson, Micrografx CEO, says the company has
the development of Windows NT is very misleading.
                    more people working on OS/2 than ever before, Grayson
Windows NT was developed from scratch to provide
                    says Mirrors is doing very well, and they are
complex, high-end operating systems functions that
                    evaluating new directions for OS/2 products. Among
are not available in the DOS/Windows environment,
                    Micrografx's OS/2 offerings are Designer and Windows
such as multitasking, multithreading, 32 bit memory
                    Draw. Grayson also reportedly attempted to get the
model, high performance file system, etc. OS/2
                    PC Week article corrected prior to publication, but
already has all these high end features, and we do
                    was unsuccessful."
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 : "...25 Million customers are using Windows already..."
;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.


  IBM Response     : While the shipment volumes of Windows is granted,
;Microsoft Claim: "[Windows NT] RPC facility is interoperable with other OSF/DCE compatible RPC implementations."
                    there are several reasons to question the number of
;IBM Response:
                    actual Windows users. First, the 25 Million number
While Microsoft claims Windows NT's RPC will be
                    is the number of shipments since Windows 3.0. Most
interoperable with DCE there are at least 13 known
                    users of Windows 3.0 have upgraded to OS/2 or
incompatibilities between it and the DCE RPC as
                    Windows 3.1.  Second, 60% of all PCs ship with
documented in Microsoft's RPC developers guide
                    Windows pre-installed whether the user intends to
available with the March 1993 Windows NT beta
                    use it or not.  Last October, Windows Magazine
program. Microsoft's decision to develop their
                    estimated that only 1/3 of all Windows shipments
own proprietary code base, instead of licensing
                    were actually being used.
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 : "Windows 3.1 leverages existing hardware and software
;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."
                    better."
;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].


  IBM Response     : It is a pretty safe assumption that most of the PCs
;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."
                    that are running Windows 3.1 are 386 class machines
;IBM Response:
                    or above with 32-bit architectures. While Windows
The requirements for PC security varies from "none
                    3.1 runs on more existing machines configurations,
at all" for most end-users to "government certified"
                    it doesn't fully exploit the capabilities of those
for military and international banking institutions.
                    machines like OS/2 2.X can since Windows 3.1 is a
Microsoft is correct that some high-security features
                    16-bit DOS extender running on 32-bit hardware.
should be included in the base operating system.
                    In addition, there are more software packages and
However, Microsoft's implication that OS/2 needs to
                    advanced 32-bit OS/2 applications.
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 : "...Usage of OS/2 has dwindled. This is because
;Microsoft Claim: "This [NT's] complete memory protection prevents errant applications from corrupting data, interfering with other applications, or damaging the system."
                    Windows NT best addresses customer requirements
;IBM Response:
                    for high-end operating systems."
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.


  IBM Response    : Contrary to Microsoft's claims, usage of OS/2 has
;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."
                    not "dwindled". Shipments of OS/2 2.0 exceed all
;IBM Response:
                    previous releases of OS/2 combined, and OS/2 2.1
By "sacrificing integration" Microsoft is again
                    has had a very positive reception in the market
implying that cut and paste and DDE don't work
                    and is currently shipping in high volumes.
across VDMs. Again, OS/2's public clipboard enables
                    [Phrase "Usage of OS/2 has dwindled" was removed
DDE and cut and paste to work correctly between
                    from the July version of Microsoft document]
applications in separate Windows VDMs (OLE works
correctly between applications in the same Windows
VDM which is equivalent to Windows NT OLE support).


                    The assertion that Windows NT best addresses
;Microsoft Claim : "LAN Server does not support RAID 5."
                    requirements for high-end operating systems is
;IBM Response:
                    subjective and unsupported. A phone survey done
This is misleading. LAN Server does not provide
                    by Communications week for their April 19th issues
RAID 5 natively, but IBM offers an add-on product
                    asked the question: "Which operating system is more
called OASAS that provides RAID 5 with or without
                    strategic to your enterprise network: IBM's OS/2 or
LAN Server installed.
                    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
;Microsoft Claim: "25% of [NT] applications are being ported from UNIX, VMS and MVS, including IBM's own DB2 database."
  include Windows 3.1, Microsoft's high volume client OS. As you can
;IBM Response:
  see, it fails Microsoft's own criteria as a client for client-server
This is a very misleading statement. IBM's MVS DB2
  computing. By these criteria, Microsoft's strategy might be looked
database is not being ported to Windows NT. In an
  at as a server-server strategy.
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 : "OS/2 2.X only runs on the Intel x86 platform. IBM
;Microsoft Claim: "IBM currently lists only 500 unique OS/2 applications."
                    claims they are porting OS/2 to the Mach kernel,
;IBM Response:
                    but this means creating an entirely new OS, which
This statement is incorrect. IBM currently lists
                    is a long and difficult project. For example,
1196 unique OS/2 32-bit exploitive applications in
                    Windows NT took over four and one-half years to
our OS/2 Applications Guide. In addition OS/2 2.1
                    develop and spent over a year and one-half in
runs existing DOS and Windows 3.X applications.
                    large scale external testing."


  IBM Response    : To compare the development of an OS/2 personality to
;Microsoft Claim: "IBM's Strategy...[is to] .. Show that Windows NT is broken"
                    work on top of the IBM microkernel (Mach based) to
;IBM Response:
                    the development of Windows NT is very misleading.
This is not correct. IBM does not believe that
                    Windows NT was developed from scratch to provide
Windows NT is broken. It is late, still unavailable
                    complex, high-end operating systems functions that
and definitely unproven. We do, however, believe
                    are not available in the DOS/Windows environment,
that Microsoft's client server strategy and products
                    such as multitasking, multithreading, 32 bit memory
are not as good as ours, as we offer a more reliable,
                    model, high performance file system, etc. OS/2
comprehensive and available set of client server
                    already has all these high end features, and we do
solutions.
                    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"
;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.


  IBM Response    : As mentioned earlier, OS/2 currently supports the
;Microsoft Claim: "Today, OS/2 is missing key mission-critical features customers require, including true preemptive multitasking (with asynchronous input queues...)."
                    multiprocessing (asymmetric) PS/2 195 and 295
;IBM Response:
                    (available today), and OS/2 2.X was demonstrated
This is a very misleading statement. OS/2 has true
                    on a variety of symmetric multiprocessing machines
preemptive multitasking (i.e. the system can interrupt,
                    at Spring Comdex 1993 and PC Expo 1993.
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 : "[Windows NT] RPC facility is interoperable with
;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"
                    other OSF/DCE compatible RPC implementations."
;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.


  IBM Response     : While Microsoft claims Windows NT's RPC will be
;Microsoft Claim: "Windows NT is compatible with Windows 16-bit and MS-DOS applications."
                    interoperable with DCE there are at least 13 known
;IBM Response:
                    incompatibilities between it and the DCE RPC as
We believe NT will be compatible with the high volume
                    documented in Microsoft's RPC developers guide
applications but Microsoft will not focus on
                    available with the March 1993 Windows NT beta
compatibility for lower volume or home grown
                    program. Microsoft's decision to develop their
applications. Also, DOS and Windows applications
                    own proprietary code base, instead of licensing
that ship with and use a DOS device driver will not
                    it from the Open Software Foundation (OSF),
run under NT without modification unless a new device
                    introduces the potential for additional
driver is supplied (per a presentation from Microsoft
                    incompatibilities. IBM's implementation of DCE is
called "A Technical Overview of Microsoft Window
                    based on software licensed directly from the OSF.
NT 3.1.").
                    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
;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."
                    Windows and 32-bit OS/2 applications. In addition,
;IBM Response:
                    integration features such as OLE and DDE do not
The error trapping mechanism in Windows 3.1
                    work between separate 16-bit Windows VDMs. In many
(and NT) for 16-bit applications is not the
                    cases, simple cuts and pastes between VDMs do not
same thing as the true protection that OS/2
                    work properly."
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.


  IBM Response    : As stated earlier, OS/2's public clipboard enables
;Microsoft Claim: "Neither OS/2 or Windows NT run on [Intel 386 systems with 4Mb of RAM]."
                    DDE and cut and paste to work correctly between
;IBM Response:
                    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
This is incorrect. OS/2 does run on 4Mb Intel 386
                    security add-ons for future releases of OS/2, but to
systems (although 6 to 8Mb are recommended.)
                    have truly integrated security, it must be designed
Windows NT does not.
                    into the system from the ground up."


  IBM Response    : The requirements for PC security varies from "none
;Microsoft Claim: "OS/2's model forces customers to choose between integration or task switching with protection."
                    at all" for most end-users to "government certified"
;IBM Response:
                    for military and international banking institutions.
Microsoft is again implying that cut and paste and
                    Microsoft is correct that some high-security features
DDE do not work between separate Windows VDMs in
                    should be included in the base operating system.
OS/2. With the public clipboard enabled, DDE and
                    However, Microsoft's implication that OS/2 needs to
cut and paste work correctly between applications
                    be redesigned from the ground up is subjective and
in separate Windows VDMs (OLE works correctly
                    unsupported by facts.  We have made design changes
between applications in the same Windows VDM which
                    in OS/2 to enhance security over the years,
is equivalent to Windows NT OLE support).
                    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
;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"
                    errant applications from corrupting data, interfering
;IBM Response:
                    with other applications, or damaging the system."
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"].


  IBM Response    : This is not correct. Because NT runs all 16-bit
;Microsoft Claim: "Windows NT is better optimized for performance-critical applications."
                    Windows applications in a single address space, it is
;IBM Response:
                    possible for one of these applications to interfere
The three reasons listed are the implementation of
                    with one of the others running in that same space.
asynchronous input queues, use of asynchronous I/O,
                    This can happen between 16-bit Windows applications
and the ability to preempt a running time slice.
                    under Windows 3.0 and 3.1 in the form of UAEs and GPFs,
OS/2 supports the last two features today and have
                    respectively, and can continue to happen under Windows
publicly stated we intend to support asynchronous
                    NT.
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 : "IBM claims that Windows 3.x applications are better
;Microsoft Claim: ".... in IBM's OS/2 applications catalog, only 500 are unique, of which only 15 are general desktop applications."
                    protected in OS/2, but this is not the default
;IBM Response:
                    configuration and can't be enabled without sacrificing
This statement is incorrect. IBM currently lists
                    application integration."
1196 unique OS/2 32-bit exploitive applications in
our OS/2 Applications Guide.


  IBM Response    : By "sacrificing integration" Microsoft is again
;Microsoft Claim: "Microsoft has met every development milestone with Windows NT and plans to deliver it as promised in Q2 1993."
                    implying that cut and paste and DDE don't work
;IBM Response:
                    across VDMs. Again, OS/2's public clipboard enables
The following would seem to suggest otherwise:
                    DDE and cut and paste to work correctly between
MacWeek, July 13th 1992: "NT (New Technology) is on
                    applications in separate Windows VDMs (OLE works
track to ship by the end of the year [1992] and is
                    correctly between applications in the same Windows
expected to cost less than $500, Gates said"
                    VDM which is equivalent to Windows NT OLE support).


  Microsoft Claim  : "LAN Server does not support RAID 5."
Computer Reseller News, September 28th, 1992: "Walker
says that Windows NT will ship during the first few
months of 1993."


  IBM Response    : This is misleading. LAN Server does not provide
Newsbytes, September 28th, 1992: "The new date is now
                    RAID 5 natively, but IBM offers an add-on product
'early 1993,' with Microsoft officials saying that
                    called OASAS that provides RAID 5 with or without
it 'needs more time to respond to customer suggestions
                    LAN Server installed.
for improvements in the Windows NT system'."


  Microsoft Claim  : "25% of [NT] applications are being ported from
Software Magazine, December 1992: "At the ITAA
                    UNIX, VMS and MVS, including IBM's own DB2
conference...Mike Maples, Microsoft's executive vice
                    database."
president, said NT would ship in April."


  IBM Response    : This is a very misleading statement. IBM's MVS DB2
InfoWorld, March 15th, 1993: "NT could ship to
                    database is not being ported to Windows NT. In an
customers later than the promised date of June 30,
                    effort to support a wide variety of server platforms,
but no more than 30 days late, Walker said."
                    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."
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].


  IBM Response    : This statement is incorrect. IBM currently lists
PCWeek, July 5th, 1993: "Gates also said Microsoft
                    1196 unique OS/2 32-bit exploitive applications in
will ship Windows NT by the end of the month [July]...".
                    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
[In the July version of the Microsoft document, this
                    is broken"
claim was removed].


  IBM Response     : This is not correct. IBM does not believe that
;Microsoft Claim: "OS/2 requires add-on products (costly products) ...and they are not well integrated with OS/2."
                    Windows NT is broken. It is late, still unavailable
;IBM Response:
                    and definitely unproven. We do, however, believe
Maintaining only the necessary functions on desktop
                    that Microsoft's client server strategy and products
machines is a significant benefit of Client-Server
                    are not as good as ours, as we offer a more reliable,
systems and it is what "Rightsizing" is all about.
                    comprehensive and available set of client server
Unnecessarily upgrading hardware and forcing unused
                    solutions.
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 : "OS/2 does not have the mission-critical features of
;Microsoft Claim: "By using the Windows NT microkernel architecture model, IBM claims OS/2 will..."
                    Windows NT today."
;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"].


  IBM Response     : Today, OS/2 has more mission critical features
;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."
                    available than Windows 3.1 and NT. When NT does
;IBM Response:
                    become generally available, it is planned to have
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.
                    some additional features that are specific to
Obviously, IBM is not behind Microsoft in any sense.
                    niche needs. These features are either available on
OS/2 is at least 15 months ahead of Windows NT in
                    OS/2 via add-ons (such as fault tolerance and RAID 5)
making mission-critical features available to customers.
                    or are planned for OS/2 or a future add-on. On the
IBM is also years ahead of Microsoft in object
                    other hand, even after NT is generally available,
technology - we shipped an object-oriented operating
                    Windows 3.1 will still have inadequate mission
system shell called Workplace Shell with OS/2 2.0 in
                    critical features for the client such as pre-emptive
March of 1992 and have delivered beta versions of our
                    multitasking and crash protection, which OS/2 has
Distributed Systems Object Model in February 1993.
                    today.
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.


  Microsoft Claim  : "Today, OS/2 is missing key mission-critical features
[In the July version of the Microsoft document, the
                    customers require, including true preemptive
claim above was changed to "IBM PSP group plans to
                    multitasking (with asynchronous input queues...)."
ship a full beta release of its first microkernel-
based version of OS/2 by the end of the 1993...].


  IBM Response    : This is a very misleading statement. OS/2 has true
For more information on the competitive advantages of OS/2 2.1 in a
                    preemptive multitasking (i.e. the system can interrupt,
client server environment, please read Why OS/2? (updated version
                    or preempt,  a running task and give control to another
available August 1993), which can be obtained from your IBM marketing
                    task). Asynchronous input queues address a different
representative or systems engineer.
                    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
Disclaimer
                    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
Some of the information in this paper concerns future products, or
                    Microsoft 's statements do not reflect IBM's
future releases of current, commercially available products. Discussion
                    priorities or product plans.  OS/2 has a 15 month
of Windows is based on information which the Microsoft Corporation has
                    lead as an available 32-bit operating system and
made publicly available as of June 28th 1993, or information in the
                    has features Microsoft does not plan to ship in
public trade press, and is subject to change. IBM's future products
                    Windows NT 3.1 such as an object-oriented Workplace
and their performance, functions and availability are based upon IBM's
                    Shell user interface and our System Object Model (SOM)
current intent, and are subject to change.
                    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
Special Notices
                    MS-DOS applications."


  IBM Response    : We believe NT will be compatible with the high volume
References in this publication to IBM's current and future products,
                    applications but Microsoft will not focus on
programs or services do not imply that IBM intends to make these
                    compatibility for lower volume or home grown
generally available in all countries in which IBM operates. IBM may
                    applications.  Also, DOS and Windows applications
have patents or pending patent applications covering subject matter
                    that ship with and use a DOS device driver will not
in this document. This document does not grant anyone a license to
                    run under NT without modification unless a new device
those patents, patent applications or to any other IBM intellectual
                    driver is supplied (per a presentation from Microsoft
property. IBM and OS/2 are registered trademarks and NetView and
                    called "A Technical Overview of Microsoft Window
SOMobjects are trademarks of the IBM Corporation. Microsoft is a
                    NT 3.1.").
registered trademark and Windows and Windows NT are trademarks of
 
Microsoft Corporation. NetWare is a registered trademark of Novell.
  Microsoft Claim  : "Windows NT's 16-bit application protection model
UNIX is a registered trademark of UNIX Systems Laboratory.
                    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.

Revision as of 03:04, 20 November 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.