Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!udel!sbcs!csserv1!cfreas
From: cfreas@csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (Terry Freas)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 Ideas
Message-ID: <1990Oct22.135507.8837@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 22 Oct 90 13:55:07 GMT
References: <4979@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de> <1990Oct21.030554.20985@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <1990Oct21.213925.21423@eecs.wsu.edu>
Sender: usenet@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Usenet poster)
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 53

In article <1990Oct21.213925.21423@eecs.wsu.edu> wbonner@yoda.UUCP (Wim Bonner) writes:
>In article <1990Oct21.030554.20985@sbcs.sunysb.edu> cfreas@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (Terry Freas) writes:
>>Actually, I think v1.3 will provide this feature along with other interface
>>portions of Windows OS/2 doesn't yet have.  In addition, it will include
>>other features *not* included in Windows.  Microsoft seems to be having the
>>two programs (Windows & OS/2's PM) leap-frog each other at every release.
>
>I was just wondering how much input Microsoft has on future OS/2?  From my
>understanding, IBM walked in and said that they wanted complete control of
>OS/2, causing MS to give it up.  

I'm not sure this is true.  Microsoft is coding OS/2 3.0 (the portable future
of OS/2).  They have announced that the Windows API will be incorporated
into the API set to allow for complete consistency (including run-time
performance) for Windows programs under OS/2 as under Window 3.x.  Still, MS
has control over the SMK, the Windows BCL, and (I think) future HPFS enhanced
capabilities.  Also, (recent PC Week ad) they have announced new versions of
Lan Man (2.0) and SQL Server (1.1) under there own label.  And, of course, the
ad has to (and does) glorify OS/2 as the advanced OS of the future.  They also
have control over TrueImage (just shipped to printer OEMs!) and TrueType
(which IBM, even though they want Adobe PS also, has said they will include).
And (tired yet?) MS by next year will bring out the first edition of the
multimedia APIs.  IBM just provides hardware on that one.  It's MS that has
spent more on multimedia than Apple.  It's MS that is working on the complete
object-ification of OS/2's file system.  etc...

>With MS doing Windows, and IBM doing OS/2, what is MS going to put thier muscle
>into?  And at the same time, will OS/2 be driven into the ground because of
>other interests such as advanced DOS and Windows?

Well, MS has said that Dos 5.0 is the last, but who knows.  They also said
that as of July of this year, PM programs would release before their Windows
counterparts.  This new IBM-MS deal has turned that around also as "OS/2 will
run Windows, anyway", etc.  MS is talking from both sides.  They have an
enormous OS/2 venture, yet avarice pulls them to milk Windows for another
couple of years.

>I like OS/2 and would like to see it improved and prosper, but how much 
>can I really hope for with things like this?

Even if MS gives up (which I doubt (above :-)), IBM is fully behind OS/2.

>Wim.
>-- 
>----------
>wbonner@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu
>27313853@wsuvm1.csc.wsu.edu
>27313853@Wsuvm1.BITNET


-- 
oo            - I live for the day earth becomes a domain name -            oo
\/ Jeremy Wohl / wohl@max.physics.sunysb.edu / cfreas@csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu \/