Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!alberta!aunro!ersys!bking
From: ersys!bking@nro.cs.athabascau.ca (Barry King)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: microsoft
Message-ID: <0aD4s5w163w@ersys.uucp>
Date: 23 Nov 90 13:43:32 GMT
References: <1990Nov16.192653.5921@unixg.ubc.ca>
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems, Edmonton, AB, Canada
Lines: 27

ballard@cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca (Alan Ballard) writes:
>  
> Here's the story according to Microsoft and IBM press releases:
>  
> -- IBM are taking over OS/2 2.0 from Microsoft.  The Microsoft position appea
>    to be that 2.0 is "complete", and that IBM just have to clean up a few
>    loose ends.   
> -- Microsoft continue to be the primary developers for "Portable OS/2"
>    (sometimes called OS/2 3.0). 
> 
> There are various ways to interpret this, but there is no way it means there
> won't be a 2.0. (With IBM responsible, it may be a bit later, however!)  
>  
> My personal interpretation is that Microsoft has backed away from OS/2 in the
> short term to concentrate on Windows, but still see OS/2 as the longer term 
> direction. 
> 
>  

According to my sources at IBM, the deal reads that Microsoft still has 
influence in the direction of OS/2 but that _coding_ of OS/2 (the 
non-portable versions) will be done by IBM.  IBM now has marketing 
interests in Windows as well and has published positioning announcements 
which inlcude Windows!  The party line is that development efforts were 
being duplicated and were divergent in some areas so this was a 
consolodation effort...sounds reasonable but you know there's more to it 
than that...