From: db3l@ans.net (David Bolen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: HELP: Where OS/2 2.0 CSD?
Date: 10 Sep 92 17:38:37 GMT
	<Bu0AJI.23s@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <1992Sep4.082048.5531@actrix.gen.nz>
	<1992Sep10.170914.16107@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
Organization: Advanced Network & Services, Inc. - Elmsford, NY

In article <1992Sep10.170914.16107@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>But Steve, a lot of us DID buy it with the understanding that we would
>get Win3.1 support and all the 32-bit stuff that wasn't in it yet.  I
>don't know about this "many 'additional' programs" you cite, but as
>for the other things, a lot of us are expecting it in a free CSD.

Well, the best I can say is that it's unfortunate that you placed so much
dependence on rumors.  IBM never announced anything official about the
contents of the upcoming CSD, except perhaps just recently, and I'm not even
sure anything is official yet either.  Certainly nothing was known back
when you would have been considering the purchase of 2.0.0.

Yes, IBM had a real nice track record for OS/2 users in terms of upgrades (I
didn't have to pay anything since v1.0), and people were certainly talking
about it, but there was no official declaration that it would have to
continue.  Again, if you wanted to place your money on it happening, that's ok
- it's your money.  But don't complain if it doesn't come out that way -
it was your choice to put the money down.

(IMHO, you'll see the CSD for free/media costs and accessible via the network.
 But that's *MHO*, as all such comments flying around are someone's opinion.
 You have to choose how much dependence to place on opinion)

>NEWSFLASH!  A lot of the peple making the transition from Windows to
>OS/2 are doing so BECAUSE THEY GOT TIRED OF PAYING FOR BUG FIX
>RELEASES.  If IBM now starts playing that same game, what do you think
>is going to happen?  If IBM now says to people that they're going to
>have to pay for stuff that they REALLY expected to be updates and
>included in OS/2 2.0 when they bought it (whether IBM ever actually
>promised that or not), how do you think that is going to leave people
>who are just regaining faith in the 'New IBM' feeling?  

Just a couple of points:

  - I think IBM is supplying *bug fixes* for free - both as patches now, and
    as a CSD upcoming (again, right now the latter is IMHO - noone can know
    the future for sure).
  - I don't think I would consider Windows 3.1 support (or even the 32-bit
    GRE for that matter) as a bug fix.  Not supporting 3.1 wasn't a bug in
    2.0, as it wasn't a design point - 3.1 wasn't yet available when 2.0
    was finished.  For the 32-bit GRE, it's a performance boost, and a nice
    new feature, but it doesn't really fix a *bug* in the current release,
    it just improves on it.  If IBM adds this items to OS/2, I don't think
    you can complain if IBM calls it a new feature as opposed to a bug fix,
    nor even if they choose to charge for getting that feature.  
  - If new features (as in last point) are worth something to you, then you
    should be willing to pay something to get them.  It's not like you're
    paying to get a *working* program (like Microsoft made us do with the
    C6.0A update) - you're paying for new functionality.

I guess it comes back to what you "REALLY expected" to be in updates when you
bought OS/2 2.0.  My personal experience with OS/2 since the beginning has been
that IBM will release fixes and improvements for free/media costs, and I hope
that continues.  But I haven't heard any official declaration of such (in
fact, I never heard such a declaration until each upgrade notice came out,
and none ever said the practice would continue).  And if IBM starts releasing
new versions with significant features, with the installed base growing so
large, I could understand that it may start costing money.  After all, even
IBM may no longer be able to just eat development and distribution costs for
such a large base.

You're the consumer - as with any other product, you set your expectations
based on what information you have, with some sources more reliable or official
than others.  You have to adjust your expectations based on the source of
information as well as the content.  In this case, I think you may have placed
too much emphasis on word-of-mouth or network rumors.

This isn't to say that what you "expect" won't happen.  I just don't think
you have all that much to complain about if it doesn't, your expectatations
not withstanding.

--
-- David
--
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
 \              David Bolen             \  Internet: db3l@ans.net      /
  |   Advanced Network & Services, Inc.   \   Phone: (914) 789-5327   |
 / 100 Clearbrook Road, Elmsford, NY 10523  \   Fax: (914) 789-5310    \
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc