From: nevries@accucx.cc.ruu.nl (Nico E de Vries)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: 32-bit OS/2 Apps List
Date: 12 Oct 92 08:31:39 GMT
Organization: Academic Computer Centre Utrecht

In <1992Oct12.054854.16201@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:

>...
>If you consider that list is likely a best case scenario for the OS/2 2.0
>apps in the next 2 years, then no I don't think they're even close to
>adequate.  

There is no foundation for the thought this could be a best case scenario.
First of all the list is clearly incomplete, like its author already
stated. Second, you are one of the few people BLINDLY believing in NT.
Many people, like me, see its potential but realize the world is
larger than Microsoft. Especially software vendors, often competitors
of MS, know this. CA for example is maybe the largest seller in the
industry (there is an ever lasting debate between MS and CA on this
subject), they WANT NT to fail, just like Lotus, Wordperfect and Borland
who all suffer from unfair competition from MS. Those people are already
busy creating momentum for OS/2. OS/2 1.3 had over a million buyers,
look at the amount of available apps just for that. 2.0 has already
surpassed that and the real sellings have yet to start (many people
wait for the 2.01 release and/or for the major apps).

>Borland only put two of their apps on OS/2, and have said
>both are development tools, and one of the (C++) was financially encouraged
>by IBM (the details are secret).

Borland almost NEVER announces programs (a VERY good policy IMO). They
are also one of the fastest developers in the industry (no wonder they
don't have to use Microsoft C :-)). I wouldn't be surprized if they delivered
more OS/2 2.0 products in the next 2 years.

>...
>Worse for OS/2 1Q93
>will bring a ton of competing OS's... NT, UnixWare, Solaris 2.0 386,
>NextStep 486, etc.

These are all competitors in the workstation area. Except for NT none
of them competes really in the DOS area. All the OSes you mention
are mainly competitors for NT.

>Novell, originally a big OS/2 backer, has decidedly backed off, pushing
>it's own (Univel's) UnixWare.

Well "backed off" is a bit much to say. They just bet on multiple
horses. Perhaps a little hype to push UnixWare but they would be stupid
not to support DOS, NT, OS/2 etc. And Novell is definitely NOT stupid.

>...
>The list SJB of apps gave us is weak relative even to the top 3 existing
>Unix platforms (SCO, Solaris, HP/UX).

Of cource, UNIX has been around much longer an attracts a different
kind of developers. Also the list is incomplete.

>...
>What possible grounds do you have for stating that "os/2's success
>is becoming more and more apparent"?  It had a respectable sales
>initially, but it's bugginess seems to have stiffled its deployment.

Oppinion. Fact is OS/2 is selling OK and is supposed to increase
sales speed in the next 6 months due to an improved revision
(less bugs, Win 3.1 etc) and more app support.

>I wouldn't say its doing poorly, but it looks quite possible that it may
>not even make the 2 million mark of the the 2-3 million copies most
>analysts said it would do in March.

Want to bet :-)

>Brian

Nico E. de Vries  (nevries@cc.ruu.nl) |------------------*   AA   III  PPP
_ This text is supplied AS IS, no warranties of any kind |  A  A   I   P  P
| apply. No rights can be derived from this text. This   |  AAAA   I   PPP
| text is likely to contain spelling and grammar errors. |  A  A   I   P
*---------------------------( Donate to GreenPeace! )----*  A  A  III  P

"The IBM PC is still waiting for a version of the CP/M OS.", G.M. Vose, 1982.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy