From: lowell@locus.com (Lowell Morrison)
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Application List 1/2
Organization: Locus Computing Corp, Los Angeles
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 16:10:02 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.034747.26369@itsmail1.hamilton.edu> jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.163148.0261104@locus.com> lowell@locus.com (Lowell Morrison) writes:
>>
>
>[re: Boffiniana]

{more Boffina Deleted
>>
>Thanks for the answer; it sounds like Boffin is far more important that
>I'd guessed and I herewith happily withdraw my questions about their,
>um, 'existence.'  I still think they need advice on how to name their
>products, however, but if they're happy and their customers are happy
>with Viperflo and Dolitte, hey, who am I to complain?
Since the names of their software are Acronyms, the people in the industry
have little or no confusion about what the programs do for them.
And they are so cute.. <chortle>...

>
>>And a listing of all available software should include all available software
>>wether it is vertical market or not.  And certianly it should include software
>>that is important to the every day man (wether he realizes it is important or
>>not, [Do you know what package the IRS uses to calculate your taxes <grin>]).
>>
>>--Lowell Morrison
>>--Uncle Wolf
>
>Well, maybe, maybe not.  Where does one draw the line?  Should we list
>every in-house piece of software written for every OS?  Why not? -- in
>house use demonstrates the significance and applicability of that
>platform, right?  Even if neither you nor I could possibly purchase
>that software...
>
Hmmm, since this discussion is about the Avaiable (read purchasable
or easily obtainiable [Shareware and Public Domain]), I would guess that
software that is basically written for inhouse use and never publicially 
released, should be excluded.  I would expect that In-House software
will show no more "significance and applicability of that platform" than
the purchasable software.  
That would mean that the Multi-variate, Fifty Deminsional Linear and 
Non-Linear Regression Software that I wrote for the Osborne I (and still 
runs on under OS/2 with a few minor changes) is not apliciable, but since 
SAS, StatPack, and Other Commercially Available Programs do much the same 
thing, that the power and flexibility are just as well represented as if I 
had released the package.  (It works, but isn't THAT well written, Osborne 
Basic and 12 years in the past <grin>).

>It seems to me pointless to try and argue that a platform (whether
>Windows, OS/2, Unix, NT, Fred's OS, whatever) is well supported by
>listing apps that are, to say the least, very, very narrowly focused and
>pitched to a very few.  I'm not saying that the measure of success is to
>be garnered only from sales figures for word processors and games, but
>there has to be a happy medium somewhere.
>

But Since the main thrust for the argument is "There ain't no ISV suppport
fer dis 'peratin sysem," a listing of all publically available programs
is pertinant.  However, the entry might have looked like:

Boffin Software (Texas, Inc. 1982)
	35 packages for the IBM PC Class machines under OS/2
	These are vertical market packages heavily used by the
	Oil-Gas and Engineering Geological Industries.  Packages
	also run under DOS, UNIX, and VM.

One ISV entry.  But then you couldn't comment on the cute names 
<GGGGRRRRRIIIIIINNNNN>.

Put a Yule Log on the Fire for ME.
--Lowell Morrison
--Uncle Wolf