The purpose of this section is to provide a forum for our readers to voice their opinions and thoughts on issues related to OS/2. If you have an observation, concern, gripe or compliment regarding something, please feel free to send them to the OS/2 CONNECT editor for inclusion in this section, at: Title & Publisher or complete the form at the bottom of this page.
The opinions expressed in this section are those of the individual writer and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the editor or publisher of OS/2 CONNECT. NOTE: Letters may be edited for inappropriate or offensive language.
I am a diehard fan of OS/2. But I would like to know what IBM is attempting to do for OS/2. For example; to run Java, I can use a Network Computer. OS/2 is not to be degraded as a Java Workstation. OS/2 lacks Microsoft Backoffice equivalents to compete directly in corporate areas. IBM executives can at least keep quiet, if they can't market the product. I can't imagine a worse statement than ...there will be a Warp 5.... Why on earth can't they at least mention some features to look forward to! This would help plan the OS to use for the next few years. I wish IBM would improve its projection of the OS.
EDITOR's REPLY: I agree that IBM should be more public about their product plans. However, JMA Software Technologies in Sweden has been following all such announcements and has written them up on a new web page: "The Unofficial Warp 5 FAQ".
I went to the Java World Tour in San Francisco last Friday 21 Feb 1997. John Thompson was present along with Barksdale, McNeally from Sun. The hand out from Netscape for the Communicator stated in the fine print that a Netscape communicator version for OS/2 and Linnux was forthcoming.
I do hope that the Java synergy that we experienced at the meeting for the Java World Wide tour is genuine and that the support of the Communicator by IBM and of Domino by Netscape in customer solutions is the path taken. We can do without the silly fighting conveyed by the press from LotusSphere.
There apparently is a difference between IBM and Lotus and IBM OS/2 as to the ways Netscape and OS/2 can work together. My vote is to have the Netscape Communicator available on OS/2 quickly and to be able to use the Domino Server and Netscape Servers in networks working together. I really would prefer not to use any Microsoft products for my product development.
I saw a version of Visual Age for Java running at the Java World tour and an example of the 1.1 JDK Sun Workshop. I really look forward to getting JDK 1.1 running on OS/2 with Visual Age for Java the communicator. John Thompson stated IBM would be supporting the 1.1 JDK by the second quarter of 1997.
Thanks again for your fine OS/2 CONNECT newsletter.
I'm a loyal OS/2 user from Down Under and Convener of the OS/2 SIG at the Melbourne PC User Group (reputedly the world's largest now but only because of the sad demise of the two leaders).
We are a small SIG but somewhat passionate about OS/2 and we agree with a lot of the comments about how badly IBM is doing with it and how "unfair" life is in general.
I want to respond to the question about Win95 support in OS/2 along the same lines I have done in BBS forums also.
I notice that MS is no longer promoting Win95, hasn't been for over nine months - everything is WinNT.
I notice that simple things still go wrong with Win95 (on my clients machines, and which I have to fix) but Service Packs don't address them.
I notice that Win95 has been an expensive exercise for MS and it appears to have either:
I interpret these things as indicators that MS has abandoned Win95 in favor of WinNT and that the next push will be upgrades from Win95/97 to WinNT, coupled with MS's big attack on the Novell network market. That is, I believe their long term strategy has been to position NT as their flagship OS - it's just that those pesky users don't seem to want it!
I am not bothered by IBM's lack of Win95 support as I can ask people to give me files in MS-Word 6/Excel 3 or 4 format etc.
I know this is not very comforting to people who have been forced to take Win95 & Win95 apps just to keep working where they are. Hang in there, guys, it won't be too long before the MS world will be pushed onto something else!
I think we will find as we look back in a few years that the Win95 period was an abysmal blip which may not have saved MS as intended. If MS cannot queer OpenDoc and Java with proprietary ActivX (let us work and pray for them to fail) then it may become another dinosaur like some of the old mainframers (Burroughs, Univac, ICL et al) and pose less of a threat to OS/2 and IBM than we all imagine.
Since Java is going onto AS/400 and MVS within the IBM line, along with a lot of other hardware in the medium to big iron field, I am confident that it has a reasonable chance of toppling Wintel from its present position of dominance in the PC arena.
Another question posed by this line of thinking - when will IBM be released from the old DOJ consent decree/s currently shackling it?
MS is presently acting like the original Henry Ford - "you can have anything you want as long as it's Win95." IBM has at least learned that the customer is king: however IBM doesn't see individual users as significant. That may be their Achilles' Heel but whether they are defeated as a result, and whether OS/2 dies or survives, depends on a variety of factors not all of which are in MS's favor.
So, as long as we can stay focused on business solutions which pay off for customers who part with their hard earned cash, I'm reasonably confident about the future of OS/2.
I have been using OS/2 since the Warp debut, and have come to appreciate exactly one thing&colon. the Workplace Shell! As far as the OS/2 kernel, I could care less, it only runs code, I don't 'see' it. Why can't IBM port their WPS code to other platforms? That would surely make switching to NT or my best hope, Linux, relatively painless. The CORBA/SOM/WPS prospects would perhaps gain much more ground if supported alongside the current market leader for program execution, whomever that may be at any one time. Heck, that OLE nonsense would all but die if WPS was available on Windows! OLE is only a factor because people are willing to buy Windows, not because people buy OLE. I do understand that the SOM code is available on Windows, maybe the WPS code is next.
EDITOR's REPLY: Your proposal is quite plausible both from a technical and a marketing perspective. To illustrate, a couple of years ago, some IBM employees put together the "Worplace Shell for Windows 3.x" which eliminates the need for the Windows' Program Manager and provides an object oriented desktop. I have given this free Employee Written Software (EWS) to several friends and neighbors who find it more intuitive to use than Windoze. As an aside, you can still download a copy of the software at: http://www.tbos2cla.com/tbog/utility.htm
RE: Your Success
There are a number of points I feel you need to address.
OS/2:
I still feel, as usual, you are using stealth marketing. Brand M$ runs ads for NT Server, they are clean, clear, and ask for the sale. Honestly, if I were out there in say the legal field wanting a network for my office, I would probably go towards NT Server. The few ads IBM have run have basically targeted the IS department, smaller customers can not understand those, management could care less about "everything on one CD" type ads.
Additionally on the ads note: I myself AND my clients both find the large spreads of "one large word and then random text" hard to get or understand your message, what product you are pushing, or where you actually ask for the sale.
On a purely OS/2 note: I work hard to tell my regional area about OS/2. SO MANY TIMES I AM TOLD, "WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS AND NOT IBM?" Customers WILL NOT accept pro-OS/2 views from a VAR - their buddies have NT and they want it too. Either IBM truly asks for the sale, or many times it is a done deal. Many say they would listen if IBM talked, well maybe yelled!!
OS/2 IS the best way to connect anything from small peer-to-peer work groups to large corporate LAN's. That message is not getting out - and LDS can only do so much.
Come see the letter I had to post on our Web site (URL below) then go to the Systems section, scroll down the menu to the letter about Windows Pre-Loads.
Killer-Apps:
Killer Apps are always shown as what makes an OS or platform catch the industry. OS/2 itself is a killer app and a great value for the dollar. I sure don't see IBM telling anyone that short of large Fortune 100 type companies that use OS/2 because it connects to so many types of servers and networks.
There are, oddly enough, killer apps for OS/2!! But guess what, most of the really neat ones have been ported to Win platforms by a company known as IBM. VoiceType v3, DB2 Server, and so many others. Not only does that take away from OS/2 sales - your killer app is now running on a foundation of lesser quality than OS/2. There is no reason you can provide a compromise - treat the NT versions of the software servers like the freeware "Workplace Shell for Windows" that was put on CompuServe to allow users to get a feel for WPS while still running on DOS/Win3.1. Not so much of the "give it away," but at least treat the OS/2 versions like the first class product and NT as second class. It seems that every department of IBM only wants to talk about the NT version of their software server. Does IBM not see that they would make more money talking about their products running on OS/2 or AIX? Again, the ads, and also asking for the sale.
Pure Marketing:
Lately the DB2 group has been talking about the new Universal Server and also getting more information to the press - actually trying to crack the stealth marketing shell. Well, has anyone read what happens to those press releases? Even though DB2 is the best, what IBM says is called "IBM claims" and other such things in the articles. Hhhhmmmm. Well, maybe your staff is STILL having a hard time "cozying" up to the press, but that is exactly what needs to happen. Brand M$ seems to live with the press, but I don't think you need to go quite THAT far. Positive sounding comments about IBM would be very much appreciated.
As well, I can't count HOW MANY times I see a review of a type of product and how many times IBM does not show up. Network Computing issue for March 1, 1997, you will find a review of switching Ethernet hubs, you will NOT find IBM there!! I know, its not software so you don't care - I just happened to have that on my desk - if you really need an example to understand I will gladly find one, just let me know.
Programming/Development:
Well, probably marketing too!! VA C++, its a great product - I sure don't see much of a push for the product. Though in one way you are getting the VA road show going again soon, and I will be speaking at the Detroit show.
IBM really has something with OpenClass and VA C++!!!
Just like IBM needs to own the foundation of a system, the OS - you need to be the compiler of choice. There is a big war over what set of classes to program to - and IBM knows that brand M$ does know how to crank out those API's. So IBM needs to work all the harder to push OpenClass - in both development and marketing.
This is WAR!!!:
IBM seems to have taken on the standard USA feeling for war, just police the problem area, help when we are asked to help, not allowed to fire the first shot, and so on.
Mr. Gerstner talks of IBM being the biggest software company. Fine, so you charge an arm and a leg for mainframe software and that helps the numbers - most people care about the PC's more than the big iron machines. And that IS what BESTeam is here to push, the PC software!! So please help us out - play like this is a war to win, not just police!!
Please - cozy up to the media, run some clear ads for real problems like workgroup networks, a presence on the Internet, and then say IBM, IBM, IBM for the solution to that need and not M$, IBM, IBM.
And while you are at it....... You might really think of getting M$ products OUT of the IBM Direct and Lotus ???? catalogues. That has a lot of my clients laughing very hard, "If you don't want to win, then sell the other guy's products." And what do you think LDS looks like when our clients say that? How do you think it feels for us to have a copy of VA C++ for Windows next to VA C++ for OS/2 - having to write portable code because some clients called IBM and they suggested one of IBM's SW Servers running on NT.
There is a long standing OUT STANDING offer that IBM is over looking: I know for a fact that David Moskowitz, author of "OS/2 Unleashed," has offered to personally help IBM solve the OS/2 marketing issues - an open offer of his service directly to Mr. Gerstner. The ONLY reason IBM would turn down or over look such a great offer is that IBM is stuck in a police action and IBM does not want to win. If this is the case - LDS is better off working with a company such as Be, maker of the BeOS, which is pumped about getting success and winning.
Summary:
We have spent a lot of time and our resources putting LDS directly behind IBM software products, but we do not like the direction IBM is going in. IBM needs to understand that we can not do all the asking for sales, clients have not heard of the products because of this problem; and we look like we are offering some lesser name products because of this problem. I seriously hope you can get these things resolved - it would be such a waste of great ideas and resources to let OS/2 and other IBM technologies slip further and further out of sight. I think the best idea for finding broad help is to take Mr. Moskowitz up on his offer. He is an outstanding player of "chess" in the computer world - watch him put brand M$ in check and mate before your very eyes - if only you would let him and other like him.
To submit a letter to the editor for this section, please complete the following form. NOTE: Some web browsers may not support e-mail protocols. In this event, e-mail or fax your message separately.
