From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Windows NT will fail -----
Date: 15 Dec 92 17:13:41 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Dec13.040601.13849@wam.umd.edu>, rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
 writes:
>In article <1992Dec12.204055.86164@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (S
TACY JOHN BEHRENS) writes:
>>>       Same as WordPerfect and WP6.0, right?  Come on, if you believe
>>>       that, I have some, er, beachfront property to sell you in New Mexico.
>>So how is this a lie?  That IS what they are doing.  I would much rather they
>
>
>       Perhaps you are not familiar with the situation (either that
>       or you are denser than lead--benefit of the doubt).

Ohh I'm hurt.  I am more than well aware of the situation as well as all the
announcements pertaining to WordPerfect's development.


(highly repetitive description of WP release deleted)

Quite frankly, I'm not suprised they are releasing a DOS version first.  If I
was them that is exactly what I would be doing.  Why?  Their DOS version is
their big money maker.  It makes sense to concentrate on the biggest products
first.

>
>       Here in the DC metropolitan area, you knw--land of politicians?--
>       we call that a blatant, manipulative lie.  I consider it
>       akin to being spit on.

Oh, sort of like MS claiming for years that OS/2 was the OS of the future and
then dumping it?  Yeah I know exactly what that's like.

>
>
>>This has absolutely zero to do with their development to OS/2 2.0.  They
>
>
>       A released OS/2 product, put out almost a year after the
>       Windows version, yet for all practical purposes
>       is two years BEHIND that version has nothing to do
>       with their OS/2 development?  It doesn't show a reflection
>       of Corel's plans for OS/2?  Are you looney?

Please *stop* deleting so much of the prelude to statements.  If I hadn't
wrote that I would have no idea that you were now talking about Corel.

That aside, it shows that Corel has an interest.  OS/2 is a reletively new
platform and it takes time to come up with something new.  The version they
released *isn't* all that far behind the Windows version.  (I should know, I
have used every version of CorelDRAW! from 2.0 on)  Obviously Windows is a big
money maker for them right now.  Same with every other vendor.  If you expect
them to come running pell mell over to OS/2 you are fooling yourself.  Corel
has released a product that works and works pretty well.  Since we would like
to see a new version out, pressure them about it, but stop bitching about
products that are released.  It isn't like they are about to release a new
Windows version anyway.  The version they did release is quite adequate for
the vast majority of the work you will every do with it.  If they pull the
stunt with putting Windows stuff in an OS/2 package again, *then* we should
really get pissed.
>
>
>>produced a "mutant version" in order to get something new on the market quick.
>>This esatblishes a presense and gives them quick market share, until they can
>>get their new version out. That's not a lack of commitment, that is being
>>smart about not losing market share by being stupid.
>
>
>       It's called, "Let's sell those dopes another one--hell, they
>       bought the 2.0 version that was basically a straight port with
>       no nice touches--what the heck, we'll get an upgrade fee.  It's
>       a good thing they're too stupid to realize that they could run
>       the 3.0 version just fine and get it for the same price.."
>
>       Please.  I judge companies by their actions, because in the
>       computer world--and ESPECIALLY for OS/2--it has proven to be the
>       only reliable way to do so.
>
Really?  You are giving MS a hell of a lot of slack if that is the case.

>       How do you judge them?  By what they say?  Hell, I bet Brian
>       doesn't even believe all the sludge put out by MS.

I judge them first, by what they say and then by how they follow up on what
they say.  I don't care for companies that put marketing ahead of products.
Sometimes problems occur with the development of a product and timetables
slip.  That's fine, but I get pissed when I am told this at the last second or
after the fact.  WordPerfect has been up front about OS/2's timetable
slipping.  OK I can accept that.  Corel systems has been up front about what
they are doing.  As of yet I have seen no breaks in that policy.  They are
doing exactly what they say they doing.  I'll get upset if I see things
turning out otherwise, but I haven't yet and neither has anyone else.  This is
the reason I am generally happier with IBM.  I don't get told things (usually)
that simply aren't going to happen.  When they are as sure as can be that
something will happen, they tell you.  If something goes wrong, they tell you
*in advance*.  They tend to avoid the irritating practice of promising the
moon and stars behind the scenes while covering their ass up front.

Does that explain it clearly enough or do you want more depth?

>
>
>
>--
> Snout: O Bottom, thou art chang'd!  What do I see on thee?
> Bottom: What do you see?  You see an ass-head of your own, do you?
> ---"I despise mystics, they fancy themselves so deep, when they----
> ----aren't even superficial"    --Nietzsche   ---------------------
>


-- 
Stacy John Behrens
*===)-------------
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The only justification for our concepts and systems of concepts is that they
serve to represent the complex of our experiences; beyond this they have not
legitimacy.                                  [Albert Einstein]
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy