From: f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Os/2ers whine again
Date: 26 Aug 92 21:17:40 GMT
 <1992Aug26.091123.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> <1992Aug26.190732.18244@tamsun.tamu.edu>
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
Nntp-Posting-User: f67700241

In article <1992Aug26.190732.18244@tamsun.tamu.edu>, bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs) writes:
>In article <1992Aug26.091123.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin) writes:
>>In article <92239.084655TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET>, Turgut Kalfaoglu <TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET> writes:
>>> Phil: If Microsoft is not responsible for dropping OS/2, and is
>>> not responsible for my personal loss of $1000 for purchasing two
>>> of their dud compilers (I thought they would continue supporting
>>> OS/2 when I bought them), who is?
>>
>>Well, you are.  You gambled $1000 on the (remote) possibility of a 
>>successful OS/2 1.x.  The rest of us hoarded it until MS Windows came 
>>along.  Don't blame MS for the choices of a free market.
>>
> You're kidding right?  In 1987-1988 MS was hyping OS/2 almost as hard
> as they're pushing NT now.

You're right on that.  They quieted down in 1989-90 as the lack of
sales revenue got painfully apparent.  I mean, in early 1988 people
were squawking about the outrageous price of the OS/2 SDK, so that
was a portent of future problems.  I wouldn't develop for a system
with THAT HIGH of an entry price, period.

>  They said (correctly) that the
> capabilities of OS/2 would far exceed MS-DOS.

Read "POTENTIAL" capabilities.  The serious drains on OS/2 1.x (lack
of video/printer support, poor DOS app support, no 386-specific code,
higher price than DOS users were used to) made it less attractive to
buyers than MS-DOS.  It's like how a coach talks about a #1 draft
pick about to be benched: "He's got great potential...."

Again, this stuff was clearly visible when OS/2 1.0 appeared.

>  20/20 hindsight says
> that OS/2 1.x was not successful.

It was apparent by May 1990 that OS/2 1.3 (I think that's what IBM
was up to by then, correct me if needed) was not attracting the bulk
of new app development.  That was almost 2.5 years of demonstrated
lack of success, an eternity in the computer world.  MS Windows was 
only in 2.x stage, and wasn't anything beyond a niche product.

OS/2 should've kicked ass, but IBM and MS dropped the ball when they
implemented version 1.x.  This was clear around the time Windows 3.0
came on the scene.  Those who complain "20/20 hindsight!" virtually
admit to jumping into the whole OS/2 thing with eyes closed.

>  When people listened to MS then,
> they were encourged to buy $3000 SDKs for OS/2 and windows was some
> secondary project.

Well, MS thought app writers would do something with those $3000 SDKs
other than sit on them for 2.5 years.  Windows is nothing more than a
GUI on top of an ancient OS (MS-DOS), and MS initially thought that 
the developers would write OS/2 apps and leave the Win apps to the 
kiddies.  Ideally, that's how it should've worked out.

Fact is, it turned out differently: Developers AND kiddies concen-
trated on Windows.  The results are on display at the cica ftp site.
90 MB of non-commercial apps, games, drivers, and tips.  The commercial
output is equally as impressive.  MS is just following the money by
concentrating on Windows.

>  Don't blame MS for someone believing what they
> actually said?  Why do you think so many experienced people wnat to
> get away from MS dominated systems?

I didn't believe anything *anyone* actually said after I purchased
Lotus Symphony 1.0 and gagged at what I saw.  :-)

I won't touch the "experienced" tag, but here it's obvious that if
MS thought they would piss off too many people by removing OS/2 support
from their products, they wouldn't do it.

MS thinks that there aren't enough of you people who gambled on OS/2 to 
make a dent in their plans for World NT Domination(tm).  If they're 
wrong, show them they're wrong and quit whin(g)ing about the injury
you've suffered at MS's hands.  Get those 32-bit OS/2 apps written!
-- 
Greg "Mockingbird" Franklin      Interviewer: "Sir, how do you spell relief?"
f67700241@ccit.arizona.edu               Dan: "R-O-L-A-I-D-S-E."