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.
EDITOR's NOTE: I would like to begin this section with the following petition that is being drafted for presentation at the next IBM shareholders meeting in April. I cannot reveal the source of this document at this time (other than telling you it is from a bona fide IBM shareholder, and no it isn't yours truly) but it is a legitimate proposal being prepared for the meeting. I believe it concisely sums up the frustrations of a lot of IBM customers, not just OS/2 users. It makes for some rather interesting reading.
RESOLVED: That the stockholders urge the IBM Corporation to immediately enact a policy to give IBM a more competitive position in the home and small office software market and instill a sense of presence and image in the hearts and minds of those who comprise this market worldwide. In urging this action, the stockholders also wish to reassure the IBM Corporation of their faith in the IBM management. This proposal is NOT intended to dictate to IBM how to plan or operate the IBM business and is NOT a protest of the way IBM operates.
REASONS: IBM must provide a much stronger defense against the very fierce battle to monopolize, dominate, intimidate and influence the current and future software customers worldwide. IBM must vigorously defend against the exposure to the erosion of IBM's traditional enterprise market.
Although IBM has a network operating system software that is an effective performance alternative to other similar competing software, IBM has NO operating system software to compete for the home and small office market where the battles begin for the love and comfortable feelings of the future software customers.
At this time, it is clearly evident that the dominant home and network software operating systems are being synergistically maneuvered and manipulated to lure all IBM customers to alternatives. Aggressive attempts also are being made to erode IBM's position in the network and server market as quickly as possible.
If IBM fails to address the exposure to erosion of its markets and fails to recognize the need to aggressively seek, respect and influence the impressions in the minds of the marketplace, IBM will be exposed to a possible insurmountable disadvantage in the fight to hold and keep even the IBM traditional enterprise customer.
If IBM fails to display presence, image and leadership in the eyes of all the current and future software customers, worldwide, others will convince the world to see and recognize that they, not IBM, have the solutions for a small planet.
IBM must assume full responsibility to be swift, timely, aggressive and effective in the defense of its markets. IBM can not rely on government agencies to be its leader in the IBM quests for markets.
IBM may be the world's software leader today, but today's leadership does not reassure leadership tomorrow. In the upcoming days very fierce battles will be waged to hold faithful customers and attract new customers. The guts, energy, savvy, creativity and perseverance of the highly motivated young entrepreneurial warriors will determine who wins and loses. IBM will NOT have the luxury to live on yesterday's successes, dictate the rules, OR determine what markets they will target. IBM must prepare to fight and compete effectively if they expect to survive on this battlefield for tomorrow's markets.
I went to Warpstock. It was a smash hit. Everybody had a great time and several new apps for OS/2 were rolled out, such as Smack! labelmaker, and Lotus Smartsuite for OS/2. I'm in the Alpha and Beta for the latter, and it is what we've been waiting for.
Nobody staged any protests of IBM. IBM is a big business company and it will stay that way; its foray into the consumer market was ill-advised because consumers just don't have the techno savvy to know they're being snowed. With today's educational system, they never will. Trying to sell OS/2 to the consumer strictly on a technical basis is like trying to sell laser printers to home users because laser is technologically more advanced than inkjet. Consumers just don't reason that way.
IBM simply does not know how to market to consumers; even their Aptiva line is free-falling. The solution is not to get IBM to throw away more dollars on an IBM marketing plan; rather, we must develop and implement our own marketing plan. In my experience we users know better than IBM -- MUCH BETTER -- how to talk to consumers.
I know all about W95, as I spent the last 6 months in a W95 shop. What a bucket of bolts! But remember, people don't choose W95, they get it by default. Microsoft's only real genius is in isolating and controlling the decision maker; 90% of the time, that's the PC vendor who does the preloads.
Hello fellow disgruntled OS/2 users. I have just recently read the letters to the editor concerning IBM's continued non-support of OS/2. I would like to add, that because of IBM's short sightedness concerning the PC, they have missed out on another very large market. I am referring to the universities across the country. I install a product, which uses OS/2, in research labs in many of the major Universities. The one question I have been asked without fail is, "why OS/2?" In all my travels to Harvard, Yale, Purdue, Emory, etc, I have only found one small lab located at Purdue University that uses OS/2 for it's networking needs. The three operating systems that I run into consistently are: Windows 95, Windows NT, and Unix. I have yet to find one MIS person who want's to even get involved with the OS/2 on our system. Even though we are not supposed to support the networking, we often have to because there is no one on campus who has any desire to go anywhere near OS/2. There are literally thousands of PCs, at every large university across the country and yet OS/2 is just not even considered as an alternative for networking. The reason usually given is because there are no apps. There are two things I have to do on every service trip I make.
I don't get it. In all the banks and Fortune 500 companies that IBM is targeting, are there no end-users of applications that would be an easy sell if IBM were to support them? Why not support the end-users who are already captive customers? Because it seems that IBM is not going after a different market. Rather, they don't want to do applications, period. All they're interested in, it seems, is "connectivity." They really don't want to enter the PC world, they still really are doing just the "mainframe thing." IBM's double-talk that wants us to believe that they are simply pursuing a different market is baloney. They aren't hunting elephants instead of deer -- they're simply saying they don't like hunting anyway, they'd rather read a book. Can't they see that even their "businesses interested in network computing solutions" have end-users who need word-processors, spreadsheets, and, say Win32s 1.3 applications, end-users who could still channel all support needs through the IS departments (since IBM seems hostile to the idea of talking to the unwashed -- really, now, one grand/year for technical support, 30 (or is it 60 -- didn't it used to be 90?) days of support for installation questions only, narrowly defined!?) It seems to me that IBM simply doesn't want to get their hands dirty. Oh well, I've been rejected before (sigh). In all fairness, whenever I've dealt with IBM people, they have been very helpful, within the limits of their overarching corporate policy; it's that policy which is hostile. Too bad. Sometimes we feel like the geek who has asked, unsuccessfully, the cheerleader to the prom -- rejected, yet the prize no less desirable, except for the fact that she doesn't wants you. (By the way, this didn't happen to me. I did take her to the prom, or rather the ROTC Military Ball!)
(Regarding the November Editorial, The OS/2 Death Watch) everyone keeps wanting to write obituaries for OS/2 when it's not dead. Ronny Ko at the former OS/2 COMPUTING faithfully did this every month. Yes OS/2 is on the hospital bed with IV's connected. But there's still a pulse and no one has started CPR. So let's not get to distracted by an 'end-in-sight' mindset because it's counterproductive and boring.
1. There will never be a wave of conversions from Windows to OS/2 no matter the relative value of OS/2.
2. There will never be a wave of ISV's turning to writing OS/2 applications. I personally doubt that Lotus and Netscape will ever even finish their works-in-progress.
3. There are relatively few SOHO users (I am one) of OS/2 and there will never be more, probably less.
4. OS/2 is a very reliable, cost effective, capable and comfortable platform to use, once you are used to it.
If you accept all of the above, IBM's enterprise OS/2 strategy based on cross-platform Java makes a lot of sense and may result in applications being developed for OS/2 that would not otherwise be available. And what is the alternative, anyway? What doesn't make a lot of sense is the way that IBM seems to actively discourage current SOHO users and ISVs with their public comments. Maybe they ARE truly determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
OS/2 will be alive as long as IBM continues to support it and their recent releases of such things as FixPak 4, 32-bit TCP/IP, and JDK 1.1.1 clearly show that IBM is still providing serious support. We all have a choice in software and can switch at any time. So if you are anticipating the 'Death' of OS/2, I would encourage you to switch to something else and report back to the rest of us on how it's going.
I just read your November editorial regarding a death watch for OS/2. I keep telling myself that it's not so, but the facts seem to prove otherwise. It's most sad. But I'm not willing to give up yet.
Contrary to the experience of several other OS/2 user groups our Philadelphia OS/2 SIG has been growing, slowly and steadily. But it does take lots of evangelistic effort, mostly by my own personal time and effort. We now have about 100 user members, about half of which pay dues to PACS. I ask everyone to consider joining PACs, but don't attempt to force it on them.
I agree with Mr. Hakari about WPSFW...IBM should come up with some slogan such as: "Free upgrade for Windows 3.11...click here" or "Better interface for Windows 3.11 and Free !!! Click here" or "Windows 95 looks alike ...free from IBM for Window 3.11 users" on Yahoo Web page, AOL on-line and then point them to download WPSFW. From there, IBM may tell them more about OS/2 Warp 4. IBM should also advertise in PC Computing, Windows magazine and local newspaper. Don't give up, IBM! There are 50 millions Windows 3.11 home users out there. Most of them will bite for free upgrade, why not?
Also, IBM should capture this "muddy water" situation (US Department of Justice vs. Microsoft) to step up with OEM's and give them a choice to install OS/2 Warp 4 for the same price or cheaper than Win95's. IBM also should step up to guarantee OEM for technical support to OEM's end-users. It is a big mistake to tell OEM's to go to Ingram or other distributors to buy OS/2 to install on their machines. No support, over price, no contact from IBM company; why should I, an PC OEM load OS/2 on my PCs to sell?
Until IBM fixes its own marketing strategy with OEM, Warp has no chance to survive by the Year 2000. Forget about WSOD and JAVA...We need the support from HOME USERS first!
It is a pity that IBM remains clueless about OS/2. I am self-employed and do heavy on-line research for the legal profession. OS/2 remains the most stable platform I have found to date, but I will be forced to abandon it in favor of MS if IBM continues to waffle on support and applications. What a waste, what a shame.
I agree with Mike Palmer's last paragraph. I started using OS/2 at work. I was the first V3 user. Now most people start using a PC at home and transfer their habits, opinions, and knowledge of PC operation to work. IBM's problem is they are used to working with professional mainframe computer support people. Supporting a home user requires a different support team and attitude. Providing help over the phone to a 12 year old is a lot different than helping a systems programmer with 20 years experience.
IBM missed the window between Win31 and Win95. If they miss the window between Win95 and NT5.0 I am afraid it is all over. A large JAVA app base may keep OS/2 from disappearing but it will not cause it to grow. If they enable OS/2 to run Win95 apps while NT 5.0 cannot, OS/2 might have another chance. I am with OS/2 until the bitter end. However, as time goes by and new apps are purchased I find I must boot up Win95 more often everyday.
As you all know, the biggest problem with OS/2 is that it can't cope with Win32 applications. Unfortunately IBM doesn't seem to worry very much about this; they are geared full speed towards network computing and WorkSpace On-Demand. The truth however is that at least 80% of the OS/2 users I know - and I know many - would be GREATLY interested in Win32 applications compatibility. So, having read and seen what Connectix did with VirtualPC for the MAC - that is, full compatibility with all Intel software (even OS/2!) - why not push them to develop a version of it that would run Win32 software on OS/2 Warp? They would seem to be the right people to do the job! We all know OS/2 is not the most vibrant of markets today - but such a product would IMMEDIATELY be the top selling OS/2 application; this means many many thousands of copies sold. Distribution of OS/2 products is also very easy, as OS/2 users are unanimously connected and used to buying software on-line. I do not think there should be huge technical difficulties; it sounds to me a very simple thing compared to what they did with VirtualPC, with everything TOTALLY different both hardware and software. I have already sent a similar message directly to Connectix. What do you, and my fellow readers, think of this?
EDITOR's REPLY: I think its a great idea. Unlike IBM, I see the Win32 issue as more of an opportunity rather than a problem.
What do you suggest for a small company that committed to OS/2 3-4 years ago do at this point? We have 40-50 users with about half of them being Remote Access Client users. The biggest problem we've had is a lack of a native OS/2 suite of applications. Our users can share files, connect to our AIX accounting system, surf the net, receive and send e-mail, send and receive faxes all directly from their OS/2 desktops. Are you suggesting that all small business owners drop OS/2 in favor of Windows NT? While IBM may not have the small business users best interest at heart we've been able to function pretty well with the available products (except for a lack of a @%&*%^&*#$%^ office suite).
We have three Warp Servers which have performed exceptionally well (virtually no downtime) and support for our hardware continues to be upgraded.
Should I dump my investment in OS/2 and go running to NT?
Yes, I had to take my eleven year old son off OS/2 as the're virtually no native children applications for him (no Win95 support) and the consumer market has all but dried up for OS/2. While the above is discouraging, I continue to have hopes that my investment in OS/2 has not been wasted. I feel that Java does offer a glimmer of hope for OS/2 as OS/2 appears to run Java as well if not better than most operating systems.
I agree that IBM will not provide much support to the SOHO market which is really a shame. But I feel that their are benefits of staying with IBM none-the-less; and I intend to stay the course till the bitter end (and it may be bitter).
I'm really frustrated (as if you couldn't tell) and confused as to where I should be investing our IT $'s. I have a relatively large amount invested in OS/2 and related products and hate to dump that investment. Particularly since my overall experience has been very good.
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.