[comp.os.os2.misc] OS Wars

David_Wright@f170.n771.z3.fidonet.org (David Wright) (05/17/91)

  OS Wars.  That's the title of an article by Jim Boyce (author of 
Maximizing Windows so he's naturally unbiased), in the May 1991 issue of 
Cadence magazine.  The opening paragraph reads:

  The headline in the Wall Street Journal said it all: "Microsoft 
Corporation to Scrap OS/2."  According to the January 28 report, Microsoft, 
the world's largest supplier of PC software, would be dropping development 
of OS/2 and concentrating its efforts on Microsoft Windows.  Forget that 
Microsoft would cautiosly deny the next day that they were scrapping OS/2 
altogether.  Wars and rumors of wars, signs and portents___OS/2 is dead; 
long live MS Windows.

He goes on to regurgitate all the rumors of Win32 as God's gospel, then;

  OS/2 Version 2.0 is being developed soley by IBM, which has never 
demonstrated much success in the PC software arena.  Many analysts and 
industry-watchers are predicting that even if IBM delivers OS/2 2.0 as 
promised, it will be no more successful than previous versions...

  But Microsoft has other plans for OS/2, which it intends to implement in 
Version 3.0, due out in the second half of 1992...

  Microsoft's statement urging developers to concentrate on Windows instead 
of OS/2 may be a large nail in OS/2's coffin...

  Autodesk is not immune to Microsoft's shift in priorities from OS/2 to 
Windows.  It is currently holding development of the OS/2 version of AutoCAD 
Release 11 until IBM delivers a 386-specific version of OS/2 2.0...

  Users are going to have as difficult a time as developers in reading 
Microsoft's intentions and gauging it's direction.  But if the last few 
months are any indication, Windows has come in with a bang, and OS/2 appears 
to be going out with a whimper.

Like PC Rag, these guys can't wait to bury it.  Does anyone else get the 
feeling that magazine editors are trying to kill OS/2 just to prove 
something to IBM?  Have these guys got a chip on their shoulders or what?

Can you say "self-fulfilling prophesy"?

                Dave


--- msged 1.99G OS/2
 * Origin: The IdleNews  (1:153/905.4)

rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) (05/24/91)

In article <9105231120.AA92724@f170.n771.z3.fidonet.org> David_Wright@p4.f905.n153.z1.fidonet.org (David Wright) writes:
>Like PC Rag, these guys can't wait to bury it.  Does anyone else get the 
>feeling that magazine editors are trying to kill OS/2 just to prove 
>something to IBM?  Have these guys got a chip on their shoulders or what?

They could still be attempting to distance themselves from the embarassing
hype when OS/2 was first announced and had the magazines falling all over
themselves trying to say how great it was.  Wasn't it by 1990 or 1991 that
OS/2 was the dominant operating system from all their initial predictions?
Plus all the stories about how OS/2 was bad news for Apple, yeah boy.

They got suckered by a classic MicroSoft vaporware tactic big time and they're
probably still upset about that.  Here we are five years later and we're
about to finally have an OS/2 that lives up to the promises made back then
(although I consider 1.3 a big improvement). 

-- 
Standard disclaimer applies, you legalistic hacks.     |     Ron Dippold