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.
An open letter to IBM, (Please note that some strong language is contained in this letter, though I try to remain professional, my ire exceeds my desire to be very civil.) I want to know just what is IBM's problem? I want to know if anyone over there has any fortitude (read guts), or any marketing ability? How about common sense? Or is that just something not permitted within IBM? I ask because from where I sit any one would help. Allow me to introduce myself. I'm an OS/2 user. A consumer, not a big company. Just an average Joe in the PC market. Well perhaps not completely average, I am also an OS/2 game developer. Or as least was up until yesterday. Now after hearing IBM's official press release that MS Windows 95 has "won" the consumer market, and OS/2 will not ever have a place there (read "we give up"), I am seeking new classification. I don't like my other alternatives, perhaps I should look to the corporate sector for future employment, so that I may still develop for the OS that I love. But wait, didn't I just see an IBM ad proclaiming the merits of NT? Let's see, according to IBM (and others) OS/2 is the only real choice for the enterprise level network, NT just can't hack it (yet). But we don't see ads proclaiming this, no we see them instead talking about NT and how such and such Notes or whatever is great for NT. DO YOU THINK THIS SENDS MIXED SIGNALS TO YOUR CUSTOMERS? Answer: IT DOES!!! Actually it may send a clearer signal then you might think, it reads (IBM is very sorry that we ever developed OS/2, we're sorry that we sold it to so many people, but since we did, we must maintain some illusion that we back it, but for those of you who we didn't fool the first time, please, please buy Microsoft Windows NT, it's really better.) GET A CLUE ASSHOLES! The OS/2 commercials were good (I liked them), but they were pulled. Have you ever seen an OS/2 ad in a major magazine? I'm not talking about an IBM ad, but an OS/2 ad. When you do see an IBM ad (or commercial), do they use or mention OS/2? NO, they run Windows. Can you buy an IBM computer with OS/2? No (at least not with the latest release). When you go to trade shows does IBM show off their OS/2 technology? No. Do they show off Windows products? Did IBM market Warp 4 as featured with cutting edge technology like JAVA and VoiceType? Yes. Are they now over a release level behind in JAVA support and ceased development of OS/2 VoiceType? YES. Does IBM follow Microsoft's lead? Yes. Can we get IBM software in an OS/2 version? Maybe, only if it is "business" software, and then it is always late and inferior to the Windows version (VAC, SmartSuite, VAJ, etc.). When I go to Office Depot, or Egghead, can I buy OS/2 software? No, are there windows versions of IBM software there? Yes. Why in the hell don't they (IBM) develop for OS/2 as well? IBM lacks the guts to succeed in the market. Who would want to risk anything to back IBM anymore. With IBM's proven track record of abandoning great, cutting edge technology because it's not instantly successful, any ISV would be a fool to do so. Can you say OpenDoc, Open32, FS-Dive, Brender, OS/2 as a consumer OS, Doom OS/2,etc. IBM abandons everything they initiate before it has a chance to succeed. Apparently no-one in IBM has any guts to speak of. Perhaps if IBM would take a lesson from Microsoft in this area they would do much better, and have credibility in the marketplace. Even if MS puts out worthless junk, they market it like it is the best thing since sliced bread, and they continue to develop it until it is good. Hint, Hint, IBM. Well I'm not going to spend too much time writing this letter, I'm bitter, frustrated, demoralized and doubt that anyone within IBM who could give a damn will have the power to do anything about it. Now that IBM has officially conceded the consumer market to Microsoft, I feel like the market I have been developing for and evangelizing for is a sinking ship. I have spent two years learning OS/2 development. And not for the business market. I am a budding game developer; I have sold four people (consumers) on OS/2 (and not easy sells they were). In the last year I have seen two of them wipe it off of their hard drives, because they "couldn't find any software for it." So thank you very much IBM. You have pissed upon all my work, and all the energy I have spent on this over the last several years of my life. And I know that you couldn't give a good God Damn either. It's just another product, just another piece of the IBM machine not doing so well. Well, damn your politicking, damn your lack of morals, and damn your lack of fortitude. Thank you for destroying my dreams of being a successful OS/2 games developer! (Note: Just in case you are confused this last but is dripping with sarcasm). I'm certainly not the only one you have betrayed. Stardock, Shadowsoft, DeScribe, SPG, and dozens of others (not counting the hordes of quality OS/2 shareware authors) have worked long and hard on expanding the OS/2 consumer market (and corporate market). There must be something good about OS/2, obviously IBM doesn't know why, something that has made us, the OS/2 consumer market, stick with OS/2 even after IBM cancelled it's consumer posture abruptly, even after countless damaging IBM press releases, or lack of support. In spite of IBM, OS/2 has achieved some success in the consumer market. There is some reason that I care enough to write this letter. Why others (Team OS/2) care enough to invest their personal, uncompensated time to promote, and share with others, OS/2. Let me let you in on a little secret... We think it is a damn good product! We love it! We have suffered through the lack of and/or slow coming of critical OS enhancements and expansions, but we have stayed. Why? We believe in OS/2. Obviously you (IBM) do not! Though it may never be absolutely too late for you to start making OS/2 a raging success, it will only be more difficult as more market share is lost. We, the OS/2 user community, only have so much patience. Mine is nearly out. This may be my last act as an evangelical OS/2 user (believe it or not). A final appeal to the gods of IBM to straighten up. I hope it does some good. (I'm not going to hold my breath though.) Good day.
EDITOR's NOTE: This is an excellent example of the frustration that OS/2 users worldwide have been experiencing with IBM. See the Editorial Page for related comments.
When is WARP 4 SMP coming out? I have been waiting for IBM to finish it by now. On my system I already have LINUX 2.0.29 SMP and Sun Solaris 2.51 for Intel (supports SMP) - both of these OSes run great with 96megs RAM. Also WARP 4. I am sure I can use WARP4's strength when the SMP support is implemented. Any info?
I was disappointed by your reply to Robin Hines (August issue), who inquired about porting Netscape Plugins from Win95 to OS/2. We all know IBM is trying to push us toward Java, but that doesn't mean we should give a rat's a*s. You might better have pointed Robin toward the large number of on-line resources that could help. Specifically I'd look at Timur Tabi's OS/2 programming page.
Glad to see a fellow cigar smoker. I've been smoking cigars for 36 years. Even Cuban cigars when I was in Panama, in the late sixties through the seventies. I am also glad to have found your publication, I never tire of reading about OS/2. Keep up the good work.
I guess I'm getting tired. I spent this last weekend trying to get Real Audio to work with OS/2 (after 3.0 they don't even support Win 3.1 anymore). Before that, I struggled to get my SB16 to work with Win-OS2, before that I struggled to get SB16 to work with OS/2. I have a Panasonic 5 CD-ROM changer that cycles through all five CD's everytime I open an app (because there isn't a good driver). I have a 3D video card that causes OS/2 to freak out every now and then without warning. I have QuickLink doing my Voice mail and Quicken doing my accounting (how much longer will they be supporting Win 3.1? And I have too much involved in Quicken to replace it with an OS/2 app. And there is no OS/2 Voice-mail app that I know of. I'm afraid to get a scanner because of the lack of good drivers. I've been running OS/2 since the first release of 2.0, I'm now running Warp V4. I hate Win95 and don't think NT is much better. Despite that I'm getting tired of swimming upstream all these years and IBM's abandonment of customers like me just about puts the last nail in the coffin. IF there is anyone out there that can tell me I have an easier time to look forward to I'm willing to listen. I know this is kind of long but the frustration has been pent up for a long time!
There is an internal power struggle going on within IBM. PSP is sticking with OS/2 but is under heavy pressure to abandon it from Lotus and others. This is why William Etherington (IBM Europe Head) made his recent anti-OS/2 comments as did Hervey Parke (Investor Relations). IBM is so large that they fight with themselves much harder than they do with their competitors. Lou Gerstner (IBM CEO) has never been a big fan of OS/2 but has recently been inclined to support some OS/2 projects for strategic reasons. The problem is that OS/2 overlaps with other IBM products and has triggered a turf war of major proportions.
In another time, IBM would have abandoned OS/2 but now it is not such an easy thing to do. OS/2 is used by some of their biggest customers and these customers are adamant about sticking with it for technical and cost reasons. Another issue is strategic. Even though their market share is very small, OS/2 is one of the few competitors to Windows. If IBM abandons it, they are walking away from the desktop, which is the hottest action, and will be just another Windows integrator. The image effect from this is substantial.
OS/2 marketing is currently stagnant within IBM because of the stalemated power struggle. The anti-OS/2 forces cannot muster enough strength to kill it and the pro-OS/2 forces cannot gather enough support to move forward with any kind of development or marketing. It's all coming down to Lou Gerstner who will have to referee all of this soon.
I don't think that IBM can afford to abandon the desktop to Windows and I think they are slowly starting to realize this. I look for a rejuvenated OS/2 strategy beginning in 1998.
I don't agree with you (August Editorial) regarding the importance of Win32 support for OS/2. I can already run Win32s 1.25 programs in OS/2 v4 but rarely do.
My biggest concern as a SOHO user is the committment of IBM to this platform. As a consulting engineer, I depend HEAVILY on my computers. If IBM abandons OS/2, I'll probably move to Windows NT but this would require an investment in software and training. Also, we would have to find new ways to do some of the things we do now with OS/2. A big hassle all around. OS/2 is perfect for our use and I would leave it
Native OS/2 software is available to do the things we need and I can't really say that limited features are an issue for any application. We use Word 6 and Excel 5 which are the last Windows 3.1 versions of Microsoft Office. Most of our clients also use these. Even if OS/2 v4 could run Office 97, we wouldn't upgrade at the moment. We are likely to upgrade to the Lotus Smartsuite before Office 97 because of its OS/2 compatibility but also because of the ability of Lotus Wordpro for OS/2's ability to manage GIF and JPG images in frames within documents. Word 6 and the Word in Office 97 also do this but not nearly as well (they crash and/or are very slow with larger images).
The main advantages of OS/2 for us are: HPFS, no crashes, no data loss (we have never lost a file), simple user interface, and multitasking (we will frequently have one computer printing, scanning, downloading data, and editing documents simultaneously).
The only real disadvantages to OS/2 are 1 - weak IBM support; 2 - indifferent vendor support (we added an Iomega drive last week and had to call up Iomega for the drivers and deal with a surly tech), and; 3 - uncertain future.
Since when is Bluebird a thin client? A thin client is on the way, but it is not Bluebird. Only 300 lines of code have been changed in Bluebird. As a product, Bluebird, is OS/2 Warp 4.0, being fire-hosed over your net, with all your applications.
It uses the hard drive as cache (when RAM is full is swapped to the drive). There is no access to command prompts, but that's it. Now, the server keeps a list of each computer on the net, and what to send it. It can send one computer a menu list with all applications on it, it can send a Netscape interface, a Domino (allow all drag and drop), and it can send a workplace shell to another computer. Each gets all the applications sent along, all data is kept on a server, but everything is run on the local computer, not the server. It is not a thin client, it is just that most IBM customers don't want the workplace shell.
Here's a crazy idea (that would have applied to your ThinkPad too). Do we have any lawyers out there? If so, consider this:
Purchase a laptop (or other computer) from a major vendor. When ordering, ask for a rebate for the price of Windows '95, and inform them that you do NOT want Windows '95 on the machine, under any circumstances. If they refuse to honor the request, file a class action suit against the company, claiming restrictive trade practices, restraint of trade, and most of all, product-tying. Ask the Attorney General for the state in which that company resides to assist in the lawsuit, on the basis of unfair consumer practices (charging you unfairly for a product that you did not request). Purchase the machine, via credit card, and contact your credit card company, asking them to join the suit too, since many credit card companies will take action against companies that rip off their customers. Advertise the whole thing widely.
Note that this does not involve taking on Microsoft, which most lawyers will not do (Professional courtesy?). Instead, it deals with smaller, more localized dealers. Thus, it has a much better chance of success, and avoids the DOJ/Anti-trust boondoggle too. And once one of these little guys goes down, the others WILL be more attentive to their customers.
Crazy idea, but I thought it might get somebody thinking. It could just work...
EDITOR's NOTE: This idea is similar to the campaign started by Adam Hall of PolyEx Software in Sarasota, Florida. You two should definitely hook up
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.