Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: AmiPro for OS/2 (was Re: Impressions of OS/2 2.1 Beta)
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 18:04:45 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <1993Jan24.001304.19923@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>>> AmiPro for OS/2 2.0 will be full 32-bit, Workplace Shell aware,
>>> multithreaded, HPFS aware, etc.  Ditto 1-2-3 2.0, Freelance Graphics,
>>> and cc:Mail.
>	Well, now.  Will it use Mirrors?  What, in this context, does
>	"Workplace shell aware" really mean?

No, it will not use Mirrors.  "Workplace Shell aware" means that if
you drag a document icon to the printer, it prints (in native form).
If you drag a document icon to the shredder, it is deleted.  This
occurs from within the program -- it isn't a File Manager or Program
Manager abstraction (although it can be, e.g. when you drag a document
icon to your AmiPro program object icon AmiPro will start and load
that document).

>>These are heartening rumors.  Where'd you get these particular ones from?
>	The Lotus rumors have been running strong for the last several months,
>	but so far there's not much to show of it.  Up to the end of 
>	December, in this group, the rumor was Jan 20th or thereabouts.
>	Well, Jan20th has come and gone, and I don't think that Ami Pro
>	is even in beta yet.  

That's why I said it was a rumor.  Those dates are unofficial,
unannounced, and specualation.  Have I qualified that enough for you?
:-)

>	(Still, there is a lot more credence to these rumors than a lot of
>	others, since Lotus has been talking *recently* and not a year and a 
>	half ago like Wordperfect and "WP6.0 will be written on OS/2 *FIRST!*"
>	statements..)

Agreed.

>>BTW, AmiPro is getting many more kudos in the Windows groups than WinWord
>>or WPWin, so a really great implementation of AmiPro would help OS/2's
>>cause more than all other 1100 alleged existing OS/2 apps put together.
>	I like AmiPro.  It would be my WP of choice if I had bought it,
>	but when I was shopping WinWord2.0 was out, and Ami Pro 2.0
>	was out--and Ami Pro 2.0 was most definately *not* superior to 
>	Winword.  

They leapfrog each other, true.

>	If it's out for OS/2, I'll buy it as long as the price is
>	reasonable (mind you, the Windows version can be had for about 
>	$115--And with 2.1, it'll run just fine under WinOS2, and probably
>	be a better value when it comes to getting updates).

The Lotus pricing structure on OS/2 has been very similar to its
Windows pricing, with competitive upgrades, technology guarantees
(e.g. I purchased 1-2-3 3.0 just before 1-2-3/G 1.1 came out, so the
upgrade was only $49), and so forth.  The upgrade cycle has also been
similar.  (1-2-3/G 1.0 was Lotus's first GUI spreadsheet, by the way;
the OS/2 version will hit its third iteration, 2.0, probably before
the Windows one does.)

Let's not forget that this isn't a take-it-or-leave-it choice for OS/2
2.x users.  They can run either the Windows or OS/2 version (or the
DOS version, for that matter).  Darn well, as a matter of fact.  It is
a take-it-or-leave-it choice for Windows users.

>>MY bleak vision of AmiPro OS/2 was really intended to spur you folks
>>on to demand the best word processor possible.
>	I wouldn't say Ami Pro is that.  WPWins only good feature--the
>	button bar (text AND an icon, easy creation, etc)--is superior
>	to AmiPro 3.0's, and all of the "big three" have tremendous featuritis.
>	(My winword menus are rediculous, even in 1024x768 mode). 

Amen.  I'm glad to hear I wasn't the only one that felt I had lost
something going from Word 1.1 to Word 2.0.  I suppose one can turn off
all the "noise," but where does one get to see the actual document
nowadays?

I suspect you'll see a trend emerge not unlike that found in more
recent consumer electronics.  Whereas it had been the fashion to put
endless buttons on these appliances, now the manufacturers are
striving for simplicity.  (I tend to like the Workplace Shell in this
respect -- it is far less "busy" most of the time.)

>>>>P.S.: Where is Stacker OS/2 now?  Talk about vaporware....
>	Please, let's not--it's been talked about since before the GA
>	was out.  

In fairness to Stac Electronics, they have never given a date.  They
do have a fairly open beta, if anyone wants to call and participate.

>>> I'm hearing first quarter on it as well, but why don't you ask Stac
>>> Electronics?
>>Don't need to.  I've got 200 MB of data stacked on my 170 MB hard disk
>>for over a year now, and it's purring just fine right now.  Before I
>>try OS/2, a disk compressor HAS to be there for me.
>	In that case, you should probably wait.  One of the problems 
>	with something like Stacker is that unless there going to be
>	a wide beta (and I've heard that there is--in fact, I saw a post
>	about this) and extensive testing, most people will be afraid
>	of the first (and maybe second) versions.  It took until 
>	2.01 before Stacker for DOS became a safe product, and even
>	then people who do silly things (stacking their boot drive,
>	for instance) have trouble unless they are very computer 
>	literate.

I would disagree with this assessment simply because we're dealing
with an operating system that has rigid interfaces for that sort of
add-on.  With DOS, Stac had to perform lots of testing to get it right
-- the operating system wasn't designed to simply drop in another file
system.

-- 
Timothy F. Sipples      | Read the OS/2 FAQ List 2.0i, available from
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/info
Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | /faq, or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP")
of Chicago, 60637       | [Read the List, THEN post to ONE OS/2 newsgroup.]