sip1@quads.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples) (05/29/91)
I thought the netfolk might like to hear of my experience today in trying
to obtain information on OS/2 from my local campus computer store. Ready?
I walked in and was immediately confronted with twin NeXT stations --
quite reasonably priced now. But I looked the other way and asked one of
the fellows behind the desk whether he knew anything about OS/2. He
asked, "What do you want to know?"
"Do you sell it?"
"Hmmm... Let me see."
And I was astonished when he asked,
"Does that run on the Mac?"
I patiently explained that OS/2 runs on the PC. (Er, some of them. The ones
without CD-ROM drives. The ones without most SCSI devices. The ones without
"exotic" display adapters -- like Hercules. But I didn't feel like compli-
cating the issue.)
And he went to his price list. Sure enough, the
price list confirmed that OS/2 was available. For $153.00. Three dollars
more than IBM's full list price, never mind the educational discount.
So that my visit was not totally fruitless, I offered,
"Do you have any information on OS/2 -- a spec sheet, perhaps?"
"Well, let me see. Tom! Where would information on OS/2 be?"
Tom, another employee, points to the IBM file drawer. A minute or two later
I was handed a spec sheet. For version 1.2.
"I believe 1.3 is the latest version -- do you have anything available on
that?"
"Well, let me check. You know, I've never sold one of these OS/2s before.
If you had asked me about Macs I would have been able to help you out.
I'm glad you know something about this."
He plods through the files a bit more.
"How about this sheet?"
The salesperson waved a sheet describing 1.3's LAN potential. I patiently
explained that I was not interested in LANs. Then he found a shrinkwrapped
package of brochures -- unopened. He pulled one of the brochures out and
gave it to me. Information on 1.3.
"Do you have OS/2 in stock or will it need to be ordered?"
"Well, that I can check for you right away. I'll check the computer."
It seemed somewhat ironic that the inventory system was Mac-based. Nonethe-
less, the Macintosh quickly produced the following information:
"Hmmm. It says here that that catalog number is no longer valid. Hold on.
I'm going to call the warehouse."
A few minutes later he has an answer. "Yes, I can get it for you. It'll
take about a week to come in."
"And you're sure the price is $153?"
"Oh, yes. Quite sure."
"Even for the 5.25 inch version?"
"Yes."
Needless to say, I said my thank yous and walked away. And I felt lucky to
get ahold of the brochure which, in true IBM fashion, would provide more
information than I needed to know, right?
Wrong. The only mention of driver support is the following sentence:
"Several popular device drivers are included with OS/2 Standard Edition
Version 1.3." Fantastic. Even my Windows upgrade notice came with a full
list of tested, compatible hardware. Perhaps IBM cannot mention non-IBM
products. But even a small list like "VGA, EGA, CGA, XGA, 8514, ..."
would have been helpful.
Not a word on required disk space. For all I know OS/2 gets along splendidly
with a single 360K floppy disk drive. Passing reference to a 2MB memory
requirement. No information on the fonts included with ATM. In fact,
the sheet is almost numbing in its lack of information.
To summarize, OS/2 is a great product, but who is marketing it? AT&T?
Just a few more drivers, built in miniapps, a $99 price tag, and a Borland-
esque marketing campaign ("if you own Windows, you can upgrade to OS/2 1.3
for just $49"; just like "if you own Lotus 1-2-3, send us the first page
of your manual and upgrade to Quattro Pro for just $99") and IBM would
sell a million copies. Or is it too late?
T.F.S. sip1@quads.uchicago.edu
Timothy F. Sipples sip1@sam.spc.uchicago.edujim@tct.com (Jim Kunzman) (05/29/91)
According to sip1@quads.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples): >I thought the netfolk might like to hear of my experience today in trying >to obtain information on OS/2 from my local campus computer store. Ready? > <GOBS DELETED> >"I believe 1.3 is the latest version -- do you have anything available on >that?" > <MORE DELETED> >Needless to say, I said my thank yous and walked away. And I felt lucky to >get ahold of the brochure which, in true IBM fashion, would provide more >information than I needed to know, right? > >Wrong. The only mention of driver support is the following sentence: >"Several popular device drivers are included with OS/2 Standard Edition >Version 1.3." Fantastic. Even my Windows upgrade notice came with a full >list of tested, compatible hardware. Perhaps IBM cannot mention non-IBM >products. But even a small list like "VGA, EGA, CGA, XGA, 8514, ..." >would have been helpful. > >Not a word on required disk space. For all I know OS/2 gets along splendidly >with a single 360K floppy disk drive. Passing reference to a 2MB memory >requirement. No information on the fonts included with ATM. In fact, >the sheet is almost numbing in its lack of information. > Sadly, IBM didn't realize that anyone would actually want to run OS/2 on anthing but an IBM machine. Marketing hype indicates that they have seen the folly of their ways and have now decided to provide much better support for non-IBM periperals, but we won't see much until OS/2 2.0 is released. >To summarize, OS/2 is a great product, but who is marketing it? AT&T? >Just a few more drivers, built in miniapps, a $99 price tag, and a Borland- >esque marketing campaign ("if you own Windows, you can upgrade to OS/2 1.3 >for just $49"; just like "if you own Lotus 1-2-3, send us the first page >of your manual and upgrade to Quattro Pro for just $99") and IBM would >sell a million copies. Or is it too late? > >T.F.S. sip1@quads.uchicago.edu >Timothy F. Sipples sip1@sam.spc.uchicago.edu No, it is not too late, but IBM must realize that their distributors are often their own worst enemies. The above situation must occur hundreds of times a day. But what alternative does IBM have? If they use direct marketing, they run the risk of alienating their distributors. If they try to educate their distributors about their products, it will cost them millions of dollars and the price of OS/2 will rise. Actually, I believe the direct marketing route is proper for certain products and OS/2 is one of them. As you stated, it works well for Borland and I might add it works well for Microsoft, too. I prefer to buy mail order because the average sales droid does not know their products. IBM must also overcome the negative impression which OS/2 achieved in the days of EXPENSIVE ram, inadequate video cards, and slow disks. OS/2 has a lot going for it; threads, generally consistent system calls, an adequate GUI, and a preemptive scheduler. There is also a lot of baggage, but that is the price we pay until we get a lot smarter about OOP. We need to encourage IBM to open up a direct marketing channel. The price reductions were a step in the right direction. Now we need development tools such as a C++ compiler, object libraries, browsers, on-line man pages, etc. and all of these at DOS prices! If OS/2 is to replace DOS, the prices MUST be competitive with DOS prices. I'm optimistic about OS/2. Even if it is renamed something else, the OS has a solid core and is far ahead of all competing PC OS's except for UNIX. UNIX has it's own problems, however. It is certainly not the OS for the casual user, i.e. the typical home, school, mom and pop business user. And I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Microsoft NT. OS/2 is available now, it works, and it's waiting for some new apps. So, it's off to programming land... -- Jim Kunzman at Teltronics/TCT <jim@tct.uucp>, <uunet!pdn!tct!jim> !(This space intentionally left blank.)
feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) (05/30/91)
Whatever you do, don't get involved with OS/2 device driver development unless you're ready to give up your real job. -- David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631 EMAIL: feustel@netcom.com or feustel@cvax.ipfw.indiana.edu
sstrazdu@hopi.intel.com (Stephen Strazdus) (05/30/91)
I tried ordering OS/2 from Elek-Tech as someone recently suggested. I
asked how much it was, and I was quoted $109, just like the previous
poster said. I was about to ask what version it was, just to make sure
I wasn't getting 1.2. Then the sales-person said she just noticed, that
they no longer sell this product.
So I hung up, got out my Computer Shopper and looked up OS/2 in the
back. Only two companies were listed. I called Software Add-ons, and
they were still selling it for $279. I asked why the price hadn't gone
down yet, and she said it would go down when they got the next shipment
from IBM. I didn't think to ask if she knew when that would be, and
didn't feel like asking. The other company listed in Computer Shopper
was still advertising 1.2, and it was 7 a.m. in California at the time,
so I doubt they were open.
I suspect Elek-tech discontinued OS/2 because they ran out and IBM
stopped shipping until 2.0 comes out, Which means Software add-ons
won't get there next shipment until 2.0 comes out. Am I assuming
correctly? Does anyone else know where to get OS/2 cheap? What will
OS/2 2.0 be selling for?
OS/2less,
Steve
--
Steve Strazdus sstrazdu@hopi.intel.comjoeb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Joe Barnhart) (05/31/91)
Uh.... I'm ready to hop on the "nobody is marketing OS/2" bandwagon, but as I recall, IBM was only _supposed_ to sell OS/2 for IBM machines. Microsoft's job was to popularize OS/2 among other hardware vendors. So before you hop all over IBM for not disclosing all of the non-IBM configurations supported by OS/2 -- remember that it was Microsoft's job to do that. -- Joe B. #include <standard.disclaimer>
sip1@quads.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples) (06/01/91)
In article <11750015@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> joeb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Joe Barnhart) writes: >Uh.... I'm ready to hop on the "nobody is marketing OS/2" bandwagon, >but as I recall, IBM was only _supposed_ to sell OS/2 for IBM machines. >Microsoft's job was to popularize OS/2 among other hardware vendors. >So before you hop all over IBM for not disclosing all of the non-IBM >configurations supported by OS/2 -- remember that it was Microsoft's >job to do that. If it was not clear in the original post, (a) the store was an authorized IBM dealer -- there was a long row of PS/2s of all flavors on one wall of the showroom, at least one running Windows. Although a campus store, these people should know about OS/2; (b) the OS/2 brochure did not even include a list of supported IBM equip- ment -- nothing about required hard disk space or video adapters, for example. It did, however, mention that OS/2 will operate on the IBM PC/AT and XT/286 "on up." The brochure did not rule out OS/2 on a one floppy IBM PC/AT with a monochrome text-only card. Aside from these points, however, isn't it clear that Microsoft is not pushing OS/2? That perhaps IBM should step in -- and soon? IBM does market software for non-IBM platforms, by the way. Current and the new Hollywood are two fine examples. The Current manual states that the software will run on Compaqs, Toshibas, Tandys, etc. BTW, my thanks to Larry Solomon at IBM who took note of the post (which, although anecdotal, seems to be fairly typical) and sent me a thoughtful and serious reply. Thanks for your help, Larry -- and thanks for keeping an eye on things here. T.F.S. sip1@quads.uchicago.edu Timothy F. Sipples Hoping to enter the OS/2 world ASAP.
roelofs@nas.nasa.gov (Cave Newt) (06/01/91)
sip1@quads.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples) writes: >I thought the netfolk might like to hear of my experience today in trying >to obtain information on OS/2 from my local campus computer store. Ready? > [etc.] >And he went to his price list. Sure enough, the >price list confirmed that OS/2 was available. For $153.00. Three dollars >more than IBM's full list price, never mind the educational discount. What a second...is this the same University of Chicago I attend? Computer store/bookstore, third floor, etc.? I just ordered IBM OS/2 1.3 on 3.5"; price: $87. UPS shipping (I'm in CA): $7.50. Total: $94.50. Granted, I don't actually have it in hand yet--I faxed the order on 16 May, received mailed confirmation postmarked 22 May, called again this past Wednesday (29 May), and they were expecting to get it from IBM by the end of the week (i.e., today, I hope), after which I could expect 4-5 days' shipping time. In other words, I'll know for sure by the end of next week, with luck. But assuming they ordered more than one copy of the damn thing, you should be able to walk over to the warehouse and pick up a copy more-or- less immediately. Call the computer store again and ask for Hiro Higa (or something like that); he's the one who took care of my order and was very helpful. Mention part number "84F7588", and feel free to mention my name if you like. I'll even mail you my order number, if they're still clueless about it. Btw, Mr. Credit Card is already charged, and I've got the receipt, so I'm going to be pissed if it turns out to be more than $87 after all... Greg
TURGUT@TREARN.BITNET (Turgut Kalfaoglu) (06/03/91)
It kills me to read stories about the bad marketing that seems to be haunting OS/2, because I am determined that OS/2 is the best operating system that is available (and I tried quite a few). My question is ARE THERE ANY IBM EMPLOYEES READING THIS GROUP? I see some Microsoft people here, but not sure about IBM. If so, can you PLEASE pass such pleas to someone who can influence the marketing of OS/2. Just passing it onto IBM internal news system may be enough too. Regards, -turgut
jonka@microsoft.UUCP (Jonathan KAGLE) (06/04/91)
In article <11750015@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> joeb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Joe Barnhart) writes: >Uh.... I'm ready to hop on the "nobody is marketing OS/2" bandwagon, >but as I recall, IBM was only _supposed_ to sell OS/2 for IBM machines. >Microsoft's job was to popularize OS/2 among other hardware vendors. Microsoft treats OS/2 1.x just like it does MS-DOS; it licenses it through hardware manufacturers. Ever see any ads for MS-DOS? -Jonathan P.S. These marketing strategies may change in the near future.
mitsu@well.sf.ca.us (Mitsuharu Hadeishi) (06/07/91)
(in reference t^ comments about Microsoft treating OS/2 like MS-DOS with a hint of changes to come) Hear, hear! Obviously OS/2 is analogous not to MS-DOS, but to Windows, because it is really an upgrade for almost all users, not a first operating system. You should be able to purchase OS/2 off the shelf, just like Windows. In fact, for most users, installing OS/2 would be a hell of a lot easier than installing Windows; there are only a few parameters to set, and in my experience OS/2 1.x runs on almost every clone in existence. The same cannot be said, frankly, of Windows 3.0. Though OS/2 is a more sophisticated operating system, paradoxically this makes it a lot *simpler* to install and maintain. When was the last time you heard OS/2 1.x users complaining about having to tweak fifteen parameters in their SYSTEM.INI file to get their system to work? Almost never. OS/2 1.x should be an off-the-shelf product. Of course, there was little reason for anyone to purchase OS/2 until MS Word was released, because there was no mainstream WP available for OS/2 until then. Sales figures before then are basically bogus since only developers would have a reason to buy OS/2 1.x. THis is no longer the case.