From: f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Survivability
Date: 12 Dec 92 22:27:41 GMT
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
Nntp-Posting-User: f67700241

In article <1992Dec12.192555.31998@news.weeg.uiowa.edu>, rahayden@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (R Andrew Hayden) writes:
> I am not an OS/2 user.  I am currently a user of DOS 5/Win 3.1 trying to
> decide where to go to next.

I was in that state 3 months ago.  Welcome to the club.

> Two and a half years ago when Windows 3.0 cam out, I immediately started
> using it and I very much liked it.  Unfortunately, there was very little
> software available, either commercial or shareware via the net.
> 
> Part of the guage I use to determine the viability of an OS is by the
> amount of software available for it.  Today, you can walk in to any
> computer store and find a specific Windows software section.  There are
> hundreds of Win shareware programs available via mail-order or the net. 
> In thsi sense, Windows is a success.  [roughly 2 years of availability]
> 
> Now, I in turn look at OS/2.  Right now, there is no OS/2 software section
> at my computer story.  In addition, there are far far fewer OS/2 FTP sites
> on the net and far far fewer OS/2 shareware programs available than
> Windows programs.
> 
> Now, I know this isn't a good measure of how good an OS is, but is parts
> of the measure I use and I suspect part of the measure that many other
> people use, how much FREE/CHEAP software is available for that OS (now
> lets not argue that OS/2 can run all DOS and Windows programs, that isn't
> the point of this post).

This is right where I stand.  The apps make the operating system, and
after two years of Windows, computer stores have gotten to the point
where a Windows-capable machine is the base PC they can comfortably
and profitably sell apps for.

You are right on the OS/2 component.  I waited for 4 months after OS/2's
release for a groundswell of software support.  I still have a Genie
roundtable on file from August 1991, where IBM employees (most notably
Lee Reiswig) assured questioners that OS/2 WOULD have lots of software
ready to run on OS/2 by March, and that Borland would provide a lot of
cheap programming tools for the budding OS/2 programmer.  It has been
almost 16 months since those promises of OS/2 software support were made.
I gave up in August 1992.

I like your FREE/CHEAP software measure also.  Most of these little progs
are produced with modern programming environments like Borland's.  There
are many nice ones available for DOS and Windows now, but OS/2 has only
a couple.  I'm not fluent in C, but I read the Usenet Pascal group
(relatively busy) and the programmers there are working on Windows/
Turbo Vision code more and more.  OS/2 programmers are invisible.  With
the good sales of Borland C++ for Windows, I think the same can be said
for C and C++.  In other words, there is a LARGE current demand for
Windows code.

> So my question, if you've managed to read this far without flaming me,
> what will the OS/2 OS look like in a year, when it is roughly as old as
> the Windows 3.x series is right now?  Will there be more programs?  Will
> there be more migrations of Windows versions to OS/2 versions?  Will I be
> able to walk into a computer store and find an OS/2 secion?
>
> The reason I ask is that I would hate to make any kind of software or
> hardware investment into an OS that is going to die a gory death in the
> next 24 months.

Hard to say.  The hardware investment in the OS is immaterial.  To run
Windows or OS/2 comfortably, you will need decent hardware.  The key 
here really is software.

I would've thought the more stable architecture and programming interface
of OS/2 would lead to more mainstream OS/2 applications than we have seen,
but it hasn't happened.  The major competitors to MS in the applications
arena, WordPerfect and Borland, who you'd think would like to see MS
fail at something, appear to be preoccupied with Windows projects and
putting the OS/2 ones on hold.  The "promised OS/2" releases appear to
be about as illusory as the "promised NT" releases.

Lotus has some OS/2 apps out, but they really don't stick out--their
Windows products are just as good, with the same features.  The free/
cheap OS/2 software market looks bleak, as you mentioned above.

Because OS/2 is so good at running DOS and Windows apps, it won't die
out.  I think the average OS/2 user (who doesn't load the PC as heavily
as the OS/2 advocates here who recommend OS/2) generally uses it as
a stable DOS multitasker.  If multitasking of DOS apps is bugging you
now on your Win system, you'd be well-advised to give OS/2 a shot.
Besides, OS/2 isn't that destructive to your wallet: only $100 as an
upgrade.  Better than Desqview, to be sure.

Otherwise, I wouldn't bother.  The technical innovations it has simply
won't be exploited.  I'm switching to Win apps more and more, and phasing
out my DOS apps.  This makes OS/2 less and less attractive to me as a
multitasker; it already is failing as a platform for popular 32-bit apps.
I'll just sit here as the Win apps roll in.
-- 
Greg "Mockingbird" Franklin  "People that are really very weird can get into
f67700241@ccit.arizona.edu   sensitive positions and have a tremendous impact
Keep circulating the tapes.      on history." -- Dan Quayle, on Malcolm X

"Father yes son, I want to kill you.  Mother, I want to----WUAAAAAAAAAAARGH!"
	-- Jim Morrison, waxing poetic on family values
"The President scores much better than Bill Clinton."
	-- Dan, comparing Bush's record of marital infidelity to Clinton's