Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Win4Wkgrps threatens OS/2.....
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 10:07:07 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange

Today at work, my boss told me she wanted everyone in the office on Windows for Workgroups. I run OS/2 2.1. How long I will be able to continue doing so may be in doubt. 
 
You see, OS/2 doesn't work very well with Windows for Workgroups. She also said she wanted all MS apps on our own PCs......!
 
We also sell all the other software under the sun, but for "maximum compatibility", it was to be Microsoft software wall-to-wall. 
 
I pointed out that as well sell and support all the other major apps, we should have first-hand experience with them: in other words, use them. We will discuss it further tomorrow.

The editorial below - reproduced without permission from ClariNet news - pretty much sums it up. Right now, a lot of people are thinking hard before giving up and falling into the tender embrace of MS Windows for Workgroups. 

Steve Withers

****************************************************************

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO, U.S.A., 1993 JAN 8 (NB) -- Can
Windows For Workgroups (WFW) be all things for all people? We 
don't know the answer to that, but if you read Microsoft's 
workgroup computing strategy you might think that's what the 
folks in Redmond, Washington, hope for.

Briefly, Microsoft says that its vision for the future is to make
Windows for Workgroups the basic operating system that would 
allow any developer's application to work with just about any 
other application through the application programming interfaces 
(APIs) contained in WFW.

If users accept WFW as the operating system of choice, one problem 
in the computing world would be done away with. Right now 
computer users within an organization, if given unrestricted 
choices, are apt  to choose a variety of applications for tasks 
such as word processing, spreadsheet, or database. If they need 
to share their data with other users, it has to be exported to a 
format common to both users, a time-consuming task if its even 
practical. 

Users preferences for their favorite program is one reason why 
there's so much unlicensed software on corporate PCs. Even when 
a company has a formal policy of standardization, users always 
have their own preferences. The company may have chosen 
database program "X" for use throughout the company. But one 
user may prefer brand "Y," and another brand "Z." The company 
will not purchase those programs, since they already provide 
brand "X." So the users bring a copy from home, and voila!, 
unlicensed software is in use.

Microsoft's vision would allow those programs to work together.  
Don't misunderstand me - Microsoft isn't condoning the use of 
unlicensed software. They are an industry leader in policing the 
industry. But WFW would allow those programs to work together, 
exchanging data at will. And while Microsoft wants very much to 
sell its own software, acceptance of WFW could give them a 
virtual lock on the operating system market.

There is doubt as to whether Microsoft sees IBM's OS/2 as a 
serious competitor. Developers seem much more willing to write 
software for Windows than for OS/2, and the public has embraced 
Windows in huge numbers. Allowing various brands of applications 
to exchange data through the APIs in WFW moves the industry one 
step closer to a truly open architecture.

Of course there's Apple Computer's Macintosh - the OTHER 
platform - to cloud Microsoft's vision. But if Microsoft should 
announce that the next version of Windows (Windows For 
Everybody?) will run on any Mac or Intel based system, that could 
sign the death warrant for OS/2. Ridiculous? Maybe not. It's 
already possible to convert files between Intel and Mac platforms, 
so who's to say that conversion couldn't be built into the Windows 
software.

Right now the biggest fly in Microsoft's ointment is the Federal 
Trade Commission. The feds are apparently about to lower the 
boom on Microsoft after a 30 month investigation, and could even 
break up the software giant into smaller entities as they did in 
the case of the phone companies (Baby Softs?).

We don't know what is going to happen, but the next few weeks 
can be critical to a company that started from nothing and has 
been built into one of the most successful companies in history.

(Jim Mallory/19930108)


-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand |      
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         |        Space for rent.
+64 4 478 4714                          |   - cheap rates, nice location. 
**** Happy user of OS/2 b2.1 ****       | 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy