From: msmith@netcom.com (Martin P. Smith)
Subject: Re: Interesting tidbit from September 7, 1992 PC Week
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 17:05:18 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting tidbit from September 7, 1992 PC Week
Summary: 
Expires: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Keywords: 

In article <1992Sep12.071313.8580@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>In article <1992Sep12.045233.23003@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Sep12.040230.6425@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>>>People keep claiming that OS/2 has vendor support.  From whom?
>>>What vendor has announced for OS/2 that hasn't announced for NT?
>>
>>Lotus.  WordPerfect Corp.  Computer Associates.  Borland (except C++).
>>Novell (server).
>
>Blush, you caught me... what I mean is do you know of anyone that will
>be on OS/2 that will not be on NT too.



You asked a question you get a straight answer now you change the question
becuase you don't like the answer. GROW UP !!!!! The rest of this post
is speulation and although it may happen is nothing to do with the question
you raised.  

>
>It's too early for WordPerfect to announce, but they go everywhere,
>NT won't be an exception.  >
>You're wrong about Borland... their whole product line is headed there.
>
>Novell has committed to requestor support (so has Banyan), but as you say
>they have not committed yet to a server.  But as you know
>(and you do know... I e-mailed you the article :-)),
>that is at least in the process of being negotiated.
>(Though I guess it could fall through.)
>
>As to Lotus and Computer Associates -- do you have the least indication
>they won't be there?
>
>The big players will always be everywhere... the question for them is where
>will the latest apps with the latest innovations be introduced.
>You're saying this won't be on the Windows NT/3.X platforms?
>
>...
>
>So there! :-)
>
>Now, since you've volunteered... answer the rest of the questions in the list!
>
>Why did the NT developers conference have 4,600 and IBM is hoping
>for only 800 at their October conference

Probabaly because at that time they had not announced the $69 SDK but
had announced that all attendees at the conference would recieve a free 
copy of the NT SDK. I know thats why my collegues went. It was the first 
oppoutunity to get hold of the SDK for the common developer.

>Why is half my e-mail from this group requests from people on how to
>get NT?  If OS/2 is not having ISV trouble, then why is Zachmann
>complaining about all those vendors "following Microsoft down the
>garden path"?
>

Because $69 is too cheap to pass up. You dont need to do anything and you can 
get a $500 product when it ships for zero cost. ( Why do you think my NT SDK
is sitting in the corner doing nothing ) Apart from the fact I cannot 
dedicate my home machine to NT when it cannot run my existing DOS and 
windows applications and development tools well enough.  

What have Zachmanns comments and IBM ISV trouble got to do with each other???
Does Zachmann work for IBM ( I didn't thin so )


>:-)
>
>
>>Timothy F. Sipples      | The OS/2 FREQ. ASKED QUESTIONS LIST is avail. from
>
>
>Brian
>-- 
>C. Brian Sturgill                       *** OS/2 2.0 is for YOU! ***
>University of Utah                  Microsoft needs some competition, but
>Center for Software Science        -I- want to be one of the many using NT.
>brian@cs.utah.edu; CIS: 70363,1373           :-) :-) :-)


Martin Smith
msmith@netcom.com 


Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy