Apple Reference & Presen…rary 8 (Internal Edition)/Apple R&P Lib Internal v8.0.iso/3-Presentations/Apple Computer Inc./Industry Competition/ROMs/Software/Mac vs. OS⁄2 pt. 3

Text File | 1990-06-24 | 14KB | 269 lines

pt. 3
Apple Confidential


OS/2 Advantages over Macintosh and Apple Responses

The following sections discuss some advantages that OS/2 has over the Macintosh
System 6.  We begin with the key advantages that OS/2 has over Macintosh.  Then
we discuss other operating system advantages and user interface advantages.  We
include these sections to alert you to objections that you are likely to face
when you compete against OS/2.  After each OS/2 advantage (except some user
interface advantages that we consider to be minor), we suggest of how Apple may
want to respond when this objective is raised.  Many of OS/2’s advantages will
disappear when Macintosh System 7.0 becomes available.


OS/2 Key Advantages over Macintosh

These are the three key long term advantages that OS/2 has over Macintosh.  It
is especially important that you understand these three objections and the
suggested Apple responses, because these objections will remain even after
System 7.0 becomes available.

Preemptive multitasking.  OS/2 uses a time-sliced, priority-based preemptive
scheduler.  This means that OS/2 automatically grants a certain amount of CPU
time (a "time slice") to each process.  The applications do not have to take
any special action or issue any API calls to enable the operating system to
perform the scheduling.  This is a consequence of the preemptive nature of the
OS/2 scheduler:  OS/2 interrupts a running process when its particular
allotment of CPU time has run out and then allows the next process to continue
to execute with its appropriate slice of CPU time.

The preemptive scheduling of OS/2 provides advantages over the cooperative
method used by MultiFinder.  Applications running under MultiFinder must
actively yield control to the operating system in order for other applications
to get a chance to run.  Unfortunately, there are situations where applications
need to perform a CPU intensive task, such as a complex mathematical
calculation or database sort.  Such a situation will leave all other Macintosh
applications virtually helpless.  Those that are running in the background will
get no slice of the CPU, and the user will not be able to do anything useful
until the the CPU intensive application yields control or is somehow halted by
the user.

Apple response:  You should find out what customers really want from
multitasking.  Our experience is that MultiFinder provides the benefits of
multitasking that many customers want.  MultiFinder allows multiple
applications to run with operations occurring in the background, such as a long
recalculation or downloading from a host system.  As Byte magazine says (Dec.
1989, p. 139), “Since most people simply want to use multitasking to perform
downloads or print in the background, the benefits of OS/2’s multitasking are
dubious.”

Stuart Alsop also questions the usefulness of OS/2’s multitasking:  “In almost
every respect, OS/2 is missing the very features—namely common routines for
routine tasks, a sophisticated user interface, bit-mapped printing
interface—that applications software actually uses in the Macintosh System
today, while the features on which OS/2 is clearly given the advantage—namely,
preemptive multitasking, named pipes, distributed processing, and
multi-processing—are not used by any leading-edge or best-selling application
program on any computer sold as a personal computer (yet)”  (PC LETTER, May 14,
1989, p. 1).

Furthermore, by using the cooperative method, MultiFinder gives top priority to
the user and the application that he is currently interacting with, which is
what many customers want.  In contrast, preemptive systems like OS/2 do not
ensure that the application currently being used gets top priority.  This
difference reveals itself when an individual performs an action, such as
clicking on the mouse.  The Macintosh provides immediate feedback, whereas OS/2
may perform other tasks before giving the user feedback.

Multithreading.  OS/2 supports multithreading, which is the concurrent
processing of multiple tasks within a single application (as opposed to
multitasking, which allows multiple applications to run concurrently).  For
example, the OS/2 version of PageMaker can reformat a document in the
background while allowing you to edit a specific page.  Since the Macintosh
does not support multithreading, the Macintosh version of PageMaker does not
allow concurrent tasks.

Apple response:  The primary value of multithreading is to make an application
more responsive.  However, the increased responsiveness provided by
multithreading may not be too significant.  Even without multithreading,
Macintosh applications usually run faster than comparable OS/2 applications.
For example, benchmarks done by National Software Testing Laboratories showed
that the Macintosh version of PageMaker was 19% faster than the OS/2 version of
PageMaker which makes substantial use of multithreading (when both were running
on 25-MHz systems).

Furthermore, implementing multithreading in an application can require a
significant investment for developers.  They must write their program so that
portions of the program—threads—can run simultaneously in the background.  An
Aldus spokesperson stated that “it took about three extra man-months to
implement all the multitasking and multithreading capabilities” in PageMaker
for OS/2.  It is not clear whether other developers will implement
multithreading as extensively as Aldus did with PageMaker.

Memory protection.  OS/2 offers memory protection, which means that each
application is protected from others running on the same machine.  If one
application crashes, the others should remain running.  The Macintosh operating
system does not have memory protection, so it cannot prevent different
applications from accidently (or intentionally) modifying each others’ memory
areas.

Apple response:  This is an advantage for OS/2.  However, just because OS/2
supports memory protection does not mean that an OS/2 system never freezes.  It
just means that it doesn’t freeze as often as a system without memory
protection.  It is not uncommon for the crashing of an OS/2 application to
freeze the whole system.  In addition, whenever the DOS compatibility box
crashes, the entire OS/2 system freezes.  Therefore, this OS/2 advantage is not
as robust as it might initially appear.


Other OS/2 Operating System Advantages over Macintosh

Here are some additional, although less significant, advantages that OS/2 has
over Macintosh in terms of operating system features.  Some of these are less
significant because Macintosh System 7.0 will negate that advantage when it
becomes available.

16 MB of physical memory support.   OS/2 permits applications to address up to
16 MB of real (physical) memory.  This is a consequence of the 16 MB addressing
capabilities of the 80286 processor.  The Macintosh operating system currently
only supports 8 MB of physical memory.

Apple response:  System 7.0 will have an advantage over OS/2 1.2 by supporting
128 MB of physical memory on Macintosh systems that support 32-bit addressing.

1 GB of virtual memory support.   OS/2 applications can exceed the physical
limits of main memory by addressing up to 1 GB of virtual memory.  OS/2
accomplishes virtual memory by swapping the least recently used information to
disk as necessary, allowing an application to "overcommit" memory.  The
Macintosh does not currently support virtual memory.

Apple response:  A third party (Connectix) offers a program which provides
virtual memory on the Macintosh.  In addition, System 7.0 will support up to 1
GB of virtual memory.

Compatibility box.  The compatibility box is a feature of OS/2 that allows an
MS-DOS application to run unmodified under OS/2.  The MS-DOS application
executes in real-mode, using the 8086 emulation capability of the 286.  Only
one real mode screen group is allowed, so only one MS-DOS application can be
run at any one time in the compatibility box.

Apple response:  The Macintosh can run MS-DOS applications when a third party
product is added, such as SoftPC or a 286 board.  When running these third
party products, the Macintosh can copy from DOS/Windows applications and paste
to the Macintosh, while the compatibility box won’t allow copying DOS or
Windows data to OS/2.

Interprocess Communications.  IPC allows applications to communicate among each
other; to share data without requiring user intervention.  For example, IPC
allows a spreadsheet application to connect to a communications program that
receives real-time stock quotes and feed the data directly into the spreadsheet
cells.  OS/2 provides many different types of IPC mechanisms.  In fact, the
variety of IPC offerings in OS/2 might dictate a significant learning curve for
developers.  Macintosh does not currently support IPC.

Apple response:  Macintosh will offer IPC in System 7.0.  System 7’s IPC will
provide an architecture allowing applications to work together more
consistently and extensively than OS/2’s IPC.

SAA compatible.  SAA (Systems Application Architecture) is a set of standards
from IBM that attempt to provide consistent interconnections and applications
among all of IBM’s computers.  OS/2 and Presentation Manager are SAA compliant.

Apple response:  This is probably more a marketing advantage than an actual
product advantage.  SAA specifications are changing and are so broad,
especially in the user interface area, that SAA compliance doesn’t mean as much
as IBM’s marketing message would imply.

Context sensitive help.  Presentation Manager has excellent context sensitive
help.  It is also hypertext-based, so that certain words are highlighted which,
when clicked on, will take you to related subjects.

Apple response:  System 7.0 offers short context sensitive help (although it
will not offer hypertext to related subjects).

Database and Communications Managers in EE.  IBM has released extensions to
OS/2 that provide database, networking and communications capabilities.  These
extensions are packaged as separate products called Extended Edition and LAN
Server.  The current release of Extended Edition (1.1) includes a single-user
SQL database manager, the client part of LAN Server and some communications
programs, such as 3270 and VT100 terminal emulation and asynchronous
communications capability.  See Appendix C for more information on the Database
and Communication Managers.

Apple response:   IBM charges extra for these components:  $830 for Extended
Edition and $1,040 for LAN Server.  In addition, Extended Edition has very
stiff hardware requirements.  System 7.0 will offer some of these database and
communications features at no additional cost.  Furthermore, System 7’s
database solutions work with a wide variety of database types and vendors.
OS/2’s Database Manager is primarily focused on working with DB2, IBM’s
mainframe database.

Richer graphics model.  Presentation Manager offers a rich graphics API that
combines elements of the Windows API with IBM's mainframe graphics package
GDDM.  It supports such features as outline fonts, curves (beziers), and device
independence.

Apple response:  Presentation Manager does have a more comprehensive graphics
model than Macintosh, even when System 7.0 becomes available.  However, System
7.0 will offer outline fonts, which is the advanced graphics element most
requested by Apple customers.  Furthermore, Presentation Manager graphics are
complex and so are difficult to program.  And based on the few Presentation
Manager applications available, the speed of Presentation Manager graphics
appears to be slower than Macintosh graphics.


Other Presentation Manager User Interface Advantages over Macintosh

As we stated earlier, the general industry consensus is that the Macintosh has
a better user interface than Presentation Manager.  For example, Stuart Alsop
said that “Compared to the Macintosh, Presentation Manager is disjointed,
non-intuitive, and confusing.”  Even though he was referring to version 1.1 of
Presentation Manager, we believe that analysts will reach a similar conclusion
for version 1.2 as well.

Presentation Manager does have a few user interfaces advantages over Macintosh.
However these advantages are so minor compared to the Macintosh user interface
advantages that we don’t think the competition will choose to do battle with
the Macintosh in the user interface arena.

Additional windowing features.

•  You can resize Presentation Manager windows from every side.  You can only
resize Macintosh windows from the lower right corner.

•  In Presentation Manager, while moving the sliders in the scroll bar, the
window scrolls at the same time.  Apple response: This doesn’t always happen,
which is another example of inconsistency in Presentation Manager.  For
example, the System Editor doesn’t operate that way.

•  Presentation Manager can automatically cascade directory windows, meaning it
will arrange open windows in an overlapped fashion so that part of each title
bar and window is showing.

•  Presentation Manager can minimize (shrink down to an icon) a running
application.  On Macintosh, all your running application windows can clutter up
the screen.  Apple response:  Macintosh System 7.0 will allow you to hide an
application’s windows.  In addition, System 7.0 will allow you to hide all
windows except the application you’re working with.

Some additional direct manipulation.  OS/2 has some direct manipulation that
the Macintosh doesn’t have.  You can drag a file on top of the printer icon to
print; you can drag a file on top of the application that created it to open
that file.

Miscellaneous advantages.

•  Advanced find file facilities.  After you have searched for a file under
Presentation Manager, you can double click on it to launch that file from the
Search window (this is better than our Find File).  Apple response:  System 7.0
will add this capability and make it even more functional.

•  Advanced Task List.  You can end any application from the Task List.  On the
Macintosh, you need to go into each application to quit out of it.

•  3D effects.  By using shading, Presentation manager icons have a more 3D look
than the Macintosh.  Some of Presentation Manager’s icons also have color.
Apple response:  System 7.0 will include color icons.


Please see Mac vs. OS/2 Pt. 4