Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!sbcs!csserv1!cfreas
From: cfreas@csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (Terry Freas)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS2 under IBM's control ~ How will this affect third parties?
Summary: Some riled thoughts on how it might affect me!
Message-ID: <1990Sep24.122117.9621@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 24 Sep 90 12:21:17 GMT
References: <4241@rex.cs.tulane.edu> <57653@microsoft.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Usenet poster)
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 54

In article <57653@microsoft.UUCP> steveha@microsoft.UUCP (Steve Hastings) writes:
>I read that press release, too.  It says that IBM is taking over the
>development of OS/2 versions 1.X and 2.X, and Microsoft is taking over
>the development of the portable version of OS/2 (the one written in C).
>Microsoft and IBM are still partners in OS/2 development, and will still
>work together.
>
>Past experience has shown that it just doesn't work to have both IBM and
>Microsoft trying to work on the same code at the same time, so this is not
>a bad arrangement.
>
>I don't think IBM has any plans to make OS/2 run only on IBM machines; the
>backlash from angry customers would hurt them, and any such plans would
>fail.  If OS/2 stops being an open system, who would buy it?
>
>In short, I believe this announcement is not a significant change in OS/2
>policy from either Microsoft or IBM.  It is a change in development plans,
>but not in policy.
>

[press release deleted]

Now this has me ticked off!  After reading somebody's summary of features
for OS/2 1.3 (things like Abobe TM and REXX included), I'm convinced IBM
can do a better job than Microsoft iat increasing functionality (speed,
memory requirements) and features (above).  However, today's New York
Times article (business section) explains Microsoft movement of 160
programmers to Windows or Windows-based applications as part of an
agreed strategy for both companies to develop for their *prefered*
environment.  Does this mean Microsoft will back off from generating all
current and new applications under OS/2?

In addition, as IBM and Microsoft stated in their press release, they
are no longer of the idea that OS/2 is a replacement for MS-DOS.  In fact,
the NYT article states that Microsoft will continue to develop MS-DOS
and Windows for a considerable period of time (past 5.0?, 3.0?).  IBM
also stated that OS/2 was only useful for machines with 2 or more
megabytes of RAM and running 'mission-critical, line-f-business, or
server-based' apps.  I have spent a considerable amount of money and
time, depending on an eventual (2 years or less) replacement strategy for
OS/2

Any more riled (sp?) thoughts?!!? :-)

>-- 
>Steve "I don't speak for Microsoft" Hastings    ===^=== :::::
>uunet!microsoft!steveha  steveha@microsoft.uucp    ` \\==|

Thanks for the post Steve.  Sheeze :-)

---
 - Jeremy Wohl
 - wohl@max.physics.sunysb.edu
 - cfreas@csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu