Death Knell for OS/2 Client

[Jay Gibberman]

Let me begin by saying that I don't think this
belongs on the list but once here should be
responded to.

>>	2) Nobody is saying why the negotiations failed, but here are
>>some possibilities:

According to Stephen King at Warp Expo West speaking in front of 
approximately 100 people, Brad Wardell is wrong. No meeting took
place. It was canceled. He says he should know he is on the committee.

>>		A) IBM still makes a ***LOT*** of money off of OS/2. 
>>I doubt that a company as small as Stardock could have made it worth
>>IBM's while.

According to Steven King nearly 100 million.

>
>If this were true, IBM would offer the client themselves.  They aren't.
>

According to Mr. King there is an internal policy at IBM that they are
trying to have resended. The policy is that all client products must be
available in from 28-32 languages. This policy is not in place for server
products. The reason they may be attracted to using an OEM from which
they can buy back, is to get around this restriction. They have also asked
for a dispensation IBM and Stardock is not the only company being considered.

>When you're expecting a decline of 10%, and only get a decline of 7.5%,
>that's "better than expected".  Watch how you read this stuff.
>

Read this, all sales of Warp products and services are up over 120% from
last year. He could not discuss this quarter's numbers specifically as they
have not been released but did give the figure above...and your source
would be?

>>	3) Everybody seems to forget that there is still a
>>CONSIDERABLE amount of OS/2 development going on, both inside and
>>outside of IBM.  That includes JFS, Java, and much more.  Come on
>>folks, just look around.
>

About 12 million dollars last year. My source is Steven King. Your source is?

>>	4) According to press stories, such as those at
>>Sm@rtReseller, IBM has already effectively released a new client,
>>albeit quietly, with significant feature upgrades.

At the moment an Aurora code base client is available to corporations
through the special services division and can be custom made. This is
of course not the same as a GA release but it does tend to point to the
language issue raised earlier as the main release issue. This was one
of the topics of the session. The service group was charged with moving
100 major customers to OS/2 based solutions by the end of the year. At
this point in time they have moved 102 and expect to continue to exceed
the goal.

>Minor detail, but OS/2's scheduled end of service is March 2002 ... for
>WSeb.  Warp 4 is sometime in 2001.

At the moment Aurora has announced support until December 2004.
Warp 5 if there is one, would be the Aurora code base. Steven King
says they have already made corporate commitments until 2005.


>You're just ranting here - this has nothing to do with whether OS/2 is
>dead or not, only whether it is needed or not.
>
>>	7) Nobody can answer one simple question for me:  What's in
>>it for IBM?
>

The language issue restriction is the reason given by Mr. King.


>>	9) For those who think OS/2 is dead (again - and again, and
>>again, and again......) get your buns to WarpStock.  See reality in
>>action.
>
>Compared to the size of a Linux user's *regional* meeting, I'm not sure
>I should be convinced.  It's nice to see, but, come on, let's get a
>grip here - is it really that big?

I would contend that Linux takes a lot more hand holding for the average
user than does OS/2. But heck what do I know. I only was involved on the
original port of Xenix which was the first Unix variant to run on a micro computer.
Then again I would frankly rather run BSDI and am content with a command
line. I find people's love of Linux amusing. It's OK....I give it two shrugs. I also
find the need of people to advocate a particular operating system entertaining.
Use what you like for what you need.

>>Given these points, let's move ahead with getting PMMail out the
>>door, and avoid regurgitating FUD.  

I AGREE.

-Jay