Have they given up?

[Kris Sorem Sr]

On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 07:38:12 -0700, Steve wrote:

>    You forgot #4: IBM never supported OS/2 and probably never will.  During
>my time using OS/2 IBM did virtually /NOTHING/ to support OS/2.  Sure, they
>would release bug fixes but a lot of the projects they announced which would
>help the OS/2 community flourish where nixed.  OS/2 was never an option to be
>installed on IBMs own personal and laptop computer.  IBM constantly blocked
>things which would help OS/2.  The more paranoid OS/2 users would basically
>say that IBM has done its damned best to kill OS/2.  On a bad day, I tend to
>agree with them.
>
From a desktop client version perspective this is somewhat true. IBM did
aggressively market OS2, including TV ads, with the release of the Warp
version particularly Warp4. Some inroad was made in the desktop market.
IBM dropped this effort and that action seems to coincide with testimony
that Microsoft threatened increased royalties on M$ products that IBM
previously contracted. A business decision not to risk their PC operations
effectively dividing up the market.

>    Get it right.  Windows is a copy of Mac which is a copy of a product from
>Xerox.  IE was an acquisition of another browser after Netscape became big.
>Of course, Netscape came from... crap, NCSA?  I can't remember the name.
>Win97?  No such beast.  WinNT came from OS/2 and, guess what, it is supported
>about 10000% better than IBM supports OS/2.
The point I made is right. Windows is a knock-off of someone else's
innovation. It makes little difference whether the product M$ chose to
imitate came from yet another source. Thanks for pointing out the typo -
Win95 of course. M$ has had difficulty competing with IBM in the
server/enterprise market. WinNT *is* an inferior less stable product to
OS2. Support is debatable. But I'm not comparing desktop client with
server/enterprise versions.
-- 
/s/~Kris <norseman@humboldt1.com>
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------