Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!van-bc!ubc-cs!unixg.ubc.ca!cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca!ballard
From: ballard@cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca (Alan Ballard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Is OS/2 dead?
Message-ID: <1991Feb2.203624.25097@unixg.ubc.ca>
Date: 2 Feb 91 20:36:24 GMT
References: <1991Jan31.231237.22301@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <1991Feb1.075050.7009@unixg.ubc.ca> <1991Feb2.155742.3843@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Sender: news@unixg.ubc.ca (Usenet News Maintenance)
Organization: Computing Services, University of British Columbia
Lines: 16

In article <1991Feb2.155742.3843@sbcs.sunysb.edu> cfreas@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (Terry Freas) writes:

>The only reason I can think of for MS taking this sidestep through
>Win32 land is to make money in the interim between OS/2 2.0 and OS/2 3.0
>for themselves with no IBM product to take any chunk of it. 
 
That pretty much matches my conclusions about what is going on here. 
I think the MS point of view, however, is that the customers have spoken,
and they've refused to by into OS/2 unless they get there via a series of 
steps that leave them with the impression they are just upgrading from
DOS. There is some (small) amount of truth to this view. 
 
Alan Ballard                   | Internet: ballard@ucs.ubc.ca
University Computing Services  |   Bitnet: USERAB1@UBCMTSG
University of British Columbia |    Phone: 604-228-3074
Vancouver B.C. Canada V6R 1W5  |      Fax: 604-228-5116