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.
In response to F.M. Macri's letter in last month's issue, "Likewise," I too VERY much wish that Corel made an OS/2 version. All I can say is e-mail them and let them know that you would BUY WordPerfect for OS/2 and tell them you would be willing to PAY NOW if they could come out with it in less than six months from the time you paid. That's what I did and they told me they don't think there is much interest in an OS/2 version of WordPerfect. I tried to tell them otherwise. Until they start getting more and more and MORE e-mail saying we'd not only be willing but have our credit cards out and numbers ready to buy will they see we are serious and in enough numbers to make it interesting for them.
My impression of IBM's OS/2 marketing is that it's undercover for a reason -- to ensure the impression that MS and their newly roped-in sidekick Apple are the only game in town, at least in the eyes of the DOJ and the courts. If IBM is active in the PC client arena, a lot of folks will worry that a hobbled MS would be roadkill. (WE know that's not true, but MS has been playing the poor, pitiful victim to the hilt lately.)
Sure, IBM is gambling here: gambling that the core strengths of OS/2 and the strong loyalty of its supporters will keep a steady flow of OS/2 business and innovations viable, even if the product is invisible to the general public. But IBM has reason to gamble, having just gotten out of a 45-year Consent Decree under court supervision. Wouldn't they just like MS to be under that same sort of onerous restriction? If IBM is perceived as being absent from the client wars, that might happen. Then, IBM could make its play with MS having to look over its own shoulder for every move. That might actually, for the first time in many years, make a level playing field.
About your February editorial, although I mostly agree with them, I'd just like to point out that there was no public beta for Warp Server. So, they still indeed could be working in that direction. I keep hearing about JFS being developed for the server (and that it may have involved rewiting bits of the kernal so that the IFS interface has changed).
I am fascinated by the run Windows 95/NT apps project described linked on: http://www.io.com/~timur/index.html. Imagine a Warp Server with Warp clients running any Windows app. Do others like the idea of a Warp Server that can run legacy apps and Java on a variety of clients, like Citrix, but with an OS/2 flavor and the ability to support the IBM Workstation 100?
This is a letter to IBM and Netscape. I've already sent it through the feedback forms of its web sites, but as I doubt anyone reads them, I hope I may get some kind of feedback through OS/2 CONNECT.
I use Netscape for OS/2 since the first public beta. I've downloaded every release since then at the moment it was available. But since July, 1997, we have no public releases and no clear information about the evolution of the product.
May I ask what happened?
There were many things happenning this period. There were many OS/2 plug-ins released, HTML development tools, and some betas of Netscape OS/2 with Java 1.1.x support has "escaped", but they are very unstable. I couldn't run the CaffeineMark benchmarks with any of then with Java 1.1.4, except the January 8 release. But this release can't display any font chance properly. Even Danda's Netscape for OS/2 page at Netscape has not been updated since September 97.
I remember when IBM advertised Warp as the OS for web surfing... Now, OS/2 users are left without even a good browser. :-(
I can't believe there isn't a Communicator OS/2 ready for a public beta, if not the finished product. I understand that IBM can be blocking the work, and the readme.txt at Netscape FTP site seems to mean exactly that.
If you are experiencing problems in the development, you could publish a note in respect of our users. IBM has no tradition of respecting any users except Fortune 100 companies, this is very bad, but Netscape has a record of good relations with its home and SOHO users. Its sad that Netscape OS/2 users do not receive the same treatment.
Please, tell anything to the public! Many wonder if there really will be a Communicator OS/2. I do not believe the users, customers or the developers are happy with this situation. And PLEASE, shorten the release cycle of OS/2 internet tools and Java. I am tired of getting the tools I need half a year after Linux and Windows developers. I already develop with these OSes, and this way I'll end up developing ONLY with them.
I would like to comment on the suggestion to implement Win32 API in OS/2. I have been looking for this implementation since Warp 3.0, I could have sold at least two of my employers on using OS/2 exclusively if only Win32 had been available. My wife is using Win95 because there are some applications that will only run with Win32. She asks me why my machine (running Warp4.0) doesn't keep crashing like hers does. I answer, "I'm running OS/2."
Please, please implement Win32 ASAP. OS/2 runs rings around Win95, WinNT 3.51, WinNT 4.0 for various reasons, don't let it die an unnatural death.
PS:
I run Win 3.1, Win95, WinNT (3.51 and 4.0) as well as OS/2 and SCO Unix on the same Pentium 133 using the OS/2 boot loader. SCO is the only system that approaches OS/2.
In 1993, at the urging of a friend who DIDN'T run OS/2, I gave it a try and came to like it a lot. In learning to use it (yes to enjoy it you do need to know something) I came across a lot of letters to editors and so on that predicted, lamented or rationalized the death of OS/2. I kept with it only because I liked it. And now I like it more than ever. There are applications that I like and run on a Windows NT platform, its no big deal to run more than one OS, and if a favored program requires something other than OS/2, that's life. Knowing more than one OS is to be encouraged anyway. Nonetheless I note that OS/2 applications for end users like me are not diminishing. There are more than ever and it keeps getting better. I was surprised to review OS/2 CONNECT and read the same old sour letters I used to read five years ago, letters that say the same thing now as then. For all you guys with nothing better to do, I wish you good luck. For my part, I've wasted enough time just writing in. There's too much going on to dwell on any shortcomings that OS/2 or IBM may have. Tell us what you did to make OS/2 better for the user community. In that I'll take more interest!
Q: And why doesn't Corel make an OS/2 version? A: Once upon a time WordPerfect made an OS/2 version. When that didn't sell well enough they made OS/2 Objects that worked pretty well with the Win 3.1 version of WordPerfect. They had very little reaction to that effort and figured it wasn't very important to have this for the few OS/2 users that seemed to want it. With Corel posting an operating loss for this last fiscal year, what incentive (read as money) do they have to make an OS/2 version? Don't get me wrong. WordPerfect 6.1 for Win 3.1 is what I use 100% of the time at home and about 45% at work (despite repeatedly being told to use only MS-Word - I create it in WordPerfect and save as MS-Word). Only when we pull out our credit cards and enough of us tell Corel we are serious about an OS/2 version of WordPerfect will they start thinking about it. Will this matter soon? I'm referring to the Win32/OS/2 project where I expect to be able to convert Corel WordPerfect Office 8 to an OS/2 native version. When that actually is in my happy hands and I'm running an OS/2 version of WordPerect (converted from Win32) I will think of this as the most important thing to happen to OS/2 since OS/2 2.0!!! To me even the WWW is a half step behind this important land mark. That is saying something. Personally I've always wanted to have an OS/2 version WordPerfect 6.1 (or newer) and Lotus 1-2-3 vs 5 (or newer). But the most important thing to me isn't if they are OS/2 native or not. The most important thing is that OS/2 can run ANY version of these two programs. I'm going to make a lot of people mad, but I look at OS/2 as the most stable platform out there for my purposes and what software I run on it was originally designed to run on it far down the list, as LONG as it runs in OS/2, even if we need a program to convert the exes, dlls, etc., to do so.
I have tried writing letters to IBM managers responsible for OS/2 here in Denmark. I have been promised that they would take my requests into consideration, particularly for Win32 support. As you may be aware, OS/2 is sold much better in Europe than in the USA. I even went so far as to ask IBM whether they were still interested in selling the product; they said no. However, I have a strong feeling that things are moving in the right direction here in Denmark; many users have problems running Win95. So, even though Win95 is very well sold, I beleive it hit bottom three or four month ago.
In my company we tried to implement a very tough applications which originally was a Desqview based multitasking application capable of handling up to 38 full DOS sessions at a time. This application was originally meant to be a Win 2 application because MS claimed in their press releases and other material that it could do multitasking. So, we introduced this to our customers believing it to be true. As you know, it was not true so we ended up using Desqview with their API.
However, we knew our customers would want to get the Windows feel so we became an IBM developer on OS/2 1.1 and have been ever since and hopefully many years to come.
We are now launching our new multitasking OS/2 Warp 4 based solution. This is one the must fool-proof applications we have ever made.
If enough OS/2 users began rocking IBM for Win95 support, a lot of people would be happy.
Personally, I am beating on OS/2 Warp 4 every day with all kinds of tests (including bad assembly language) but it is like an elephant; it shakes it head after a while then starts running again.
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.