From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS ready to release 32-bit Word & Excel?!?! Read on...
Date: 10 Oct 92 22:21:06 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Oct05.190659.24067@microsoft.com>, philipla@microsoft.com (Phil
Lafornara) writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.141621.6764@cu23.crl.aecl.ca> gutz@cc49.crl.aecl.ca writes
:
>>In article <1992Oct01.185753.6638@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil
Lafornara) writes:
>>>
>>>     IBM could predict 4 million - that doesn't change the current
>>>facts.
>>
>>Agreed, IBM, like Microsoft, can predict that cows will fall from the sky
>>on Tuesday.  But the fact remains that OS/2 is selling - and probably better
>>than MS could have guessed.
>
>     OS/2 is indeed selling - but neither of us has any clue how well.
>We have some numbers from IBM, and we have some conflicting numbers
>from Microsoft.  Who's to say which is closer to the truth?
>

Agreed.
>
>>>     OK - we were using different definitions.  I thought you were
>>>referring to a specific app, while you were apparently talking
>>>about a set of applications.
>>
>>I don't think we are using different definitions.  I want to use OS/2 and
>>I need a word processor.  I really don;t care if it's Word or something else.
>>If I learned Word I can take a bit of time to learn something else.
>
>     That's not the definition I was using.  Reread my paragraph and
>you will see what I originally meant.
>
>
>>>     Hmm... A couple of thoughts.  If Microsoft were indeed developing
>>>OS/2 apps, it would be in the company's best interest to make sure
>>>that OS/2 users knew that these apps were coming - otherwise they
>>>might go out and purchase a competitor's product.  True?
>>
>>No not true - in fact complete garbage.  If I had just spent millions on my
>>new OS, which although superior in many ways to OS/2, I would still need
>>to get a foot hold in the market.  The easiest way to do that is to make
>>my OS run my apps, and not produce my apps for OS/2.
>
>     Complete garbage?  Interesting.  I was trying to point out a
>logical flaw in the argument that Microsoft _must_ be producing
>OS/2 apps.  It was a hypothetical - Microsoft is _not_, to the best
>of my knowledge, producing any applications for OS/2.
>     Slow down and read what I've written, please.  It will lead to
>fewer misunderstandings.
>
>
>>>      I think OS/2 may fail.  I think Windows NT may succeed.  At
>>>this time I'm not willing to make a more definite statement.
>>
>>That's exactly what you are paid to think, and that's no fault of yours.
>
>     I wasn't aware that I was being paid to think about OS/2 and
>Windows NT.  Thank you for providing me with this new information.
>     Just out of curiosity, which part of the above am I being paid
>to think?  That there is a possibility that OS/2 may fail?  That there
>is a possibility that NT may succeed?  Or that I'm not willing to make
>a definite statement on either?
>
>
>>But I do remeber Bill Gates saying that OS/2 would be the OS of the future
>>back when MS controlled it.
>
>     And the public said "No thanks, we'll take Windows."  Bill was
>wrong.

And I wonder why?  OS/2 1.x stunk.  It was just plain a bad product.  Windows
wasn't great, but it was a pretty good alternative at the time.  MS's switch
however burned a LOT of people.  Respond to what he wrote.

>
>
>>  MS has a pathetic track record when it comes
>>to envisioning the future - The key MS's success is that they magically end
>>up in the right place at the right time - but how long will thier luck
>>continue??
>
>     You can't seriously believe that Microsoft's success is due to
>luck.

To a certain extent it is very much due to luck.  MS getting to do the
operating system for the IBM PC was pure unadulterated luck on their part.
The initail success of Windows 3.0 was due very much to fortunate market
forces at the time, and a good marketing campaign.  Now MS has capitalized
very well on this, but it was a good lucky break for them.
>
>
>>  You can tell people the NT is the greatest, but when it boils
>>down, the consumer will do whatever he wants, and niether IBM nor MS will
>>be able to control it.
>
>     Exactly what I've been saying all along.  Have you been reading
>the posts that you are replying to?

Have you?
>
>                               -Phil
>--
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Phil Lafornara                                         1 Microsoft Way
>philipla@microsoft.com                         Redmond, WA 98052-6399
>Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
>
-- 
Stacy John Behrens
*===)-------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy