From: xtifr@netcom.com (Chris Waters)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: os2 support
Keywords: os2 ms
Date: 14 Aug 92 10:58:21 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In <ZH5gPB2w165w@halcyon.com> Steven Robertson <srobert@halcyon.com> writes:

>The question which has been sticking out in my mind in reading alot of 
>the threads has been:
>        Why did MS cut off support for OS/2 2.0?

And a good question it is, too.  I've got a stack of MSC++ 7.0 gathering
dust on the bookshelf at the moment, and I really am curious why.

However:

>  a.  Could it be that IBM cut of MS from the source code making it
>difficult to support a product?
> 
>  b.  Or could it be that MS is trying to undermine IBM and OS/2?

My guess is neither!  A is unlikely, B is an *effect*, not a cause!!
Try these possibilities on for size:

A.  IBM did something to piss off MS.

B.  MS did something to piss off IBM.

C.  MS simply gave up on OS/2.

D.  all of the above.

I've heard rumors that tend to make me suspect that A is correct--in
fact, I've heard a very specific, but *completely* unverified rumor (from
a former IBM employee) that MS was p-o'd about a deal IBM signed with
Borland.  I heard another rumor that MS was pissed because IBM decided
to use a port of their AS400 C compiler for the 32-bit version of OS/2,
rather than wait for MS to do the 32-bit version of MSC.  Take these
rumors with large grains of salt.

>IMEHO I believe that A. would be more likely.  It is amazing to believ
>that for a group to be developing a product for more than five years that 
>it would all of a sudden turn into "That's IBM's product not our type 
>stuff".

As far as I know, MS *still* has access to OS/2 code if they want it. 
And always has.  But I agree that their actions in dropping support for
the product *do* seem amazing.  I sure *hope* that they have *damn* good
reasons!!  I have been a big fan of MS for years, but their actions over
the last year have left a *very* bitter taste in my mouth.  I'd *like*
to believe that they were justified in what they did, but I have yet to
hear any substantive comments on this topic from either the MSers or
IBMers on the group.

>    The other bone I have to pick with some of the posts I have read deal 
>w/direct attacks on the MS employees who post on this conference.

Without a doubt, some of the flaming here has been above and beyond the
call of duty.  :-)  I suspect that some of the flamers are angry OS/2
1.x users who feel abandoned, some have been upset by one particular MS
employee who is no longer active (but whose initials are GL), and some
just flame because they are immature.  And some of us flame those
moronic, brain-dead, unskilled programmers at MS (a company which has
never produced any worthwhile apps or OSes) just because flaming is fun,
in moderation, and we know that most of the MS guys can recognize a joke
when they see it.  :-) :-) :-)

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Phil and Pete for their
continuing presence here.  I may not always agree with what they say,
but it's nice to have additional sources of info, and they've both done
an admirable job of retaining their senses of humor against often
overwhelming odds.
-- 
Chris Waters    | the insane don't | NOBODY for President!
xtifr@netcom.COM| need disclaimers | Because Nobody's perfect!!
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy