🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <c0.9w.2FVPFB$02w@picard.cds-inc.com>,  <replyto> wrote:
>In <5h1uga$7li@client2.news.psi.net>, os2@mistik.express.net (Mustafa Soysal MS57) writes:
>>>Why should you be surprised?  That is exactly the market that IBM has been
>>>saying they are pursuing with OS/2.  ISV's who write software for that kind
>>
>>That's a lie.  IBM has not been saying from 2.0 on that they were
>>pursuing only the banks and insurances.  On the contrary, they were
>>saying they were targeting small businesses for their mission critical
>>computing needs.  
>
>I think your language is a little strong.  OS/2 has always been targeted mainly

A lie is a lie, nothing less.

>towards the fortune 500-type organizations.  Sure, they toyed with the

That's another lie.  And to set it straight, small businesses are not
toys, neither are consumers!

>small office/home office market as well as the consumer market, but OS/2
>came from an organization that has always been devoted to developing
>products for the big corporate market.    Small businesses have little use
>for things like Communications Manager/2, or CICS/2, for example.   The

You have no idea what small businesses have a use for.

>SOHO/consumer efforts have always been a lower priority, looking at the
>history of OS/2.

The history from a point between 2.1 and 3.0....They did fine with their
efforts during 2.0 and early 2.1.

>
>I'm sorry your fax/data utility failed, but you can't blame the lack of demand for
>such a niche product on OS/2 as you have done in previous posts - I'd be surprised

You have a reading comprehension problem.  I said IBM lied about the
number of OS/2 sales and witheld information that most of the sales went
to banks and insurances.  There were no more than about 10,000 real
buyers be it small businesses or home office users, yet IBM was claiming
1 mio sales at that time.  And I said, even today, there is no market of
1mio real buyers outside of IBM's "channel marketing", and writing
applications other than the bank or insurance market will see no market.
(Not even small business applications)

>if you sold many more copies of such a thing on any platform. You obviously 
>have an axe to grind with OS/2, and seem to go out of your way 

You would have an axe to gring with IBM if they weren't able to bring
out a stable version that can run more than 24 hours stable (that's the
most stable it got, after dooming the system to do pretty much nothing
dropping another line of business). And if you invested about $20K in
hard cash into the OS/2 software platform, not counting your time and
efforts, you would not been writing with the ignorance you did when this
damned OS can't run straight for a day if it is busy with anything.  It
isn't good for anything, not even terminal emulation for some people if
they are using certain video cards (Matrox for example).  

If you ask IBM what runs without problems, you won't get an answer,
because everything is having problems with OS/2.  I have gone out of my
way to help nail down problems with them, my phonebills to IBM ranked
about $100/mo, wasted several days of my weks trying to restore the
system after it wiped out disks, reinstalling software etc., the system
is futile if you make any heavy use of it.  There is nothing mission
critical you can do with this system.

If you report a problem, they say they never heard of it, yet I found
people on the net who have been told the same although I had opened PARs
on these same problems.  It is a damned lying machine that is selling us
OS/2.  No more.

>to disparage it (and OS/2 users, on occasion), for some unknown reason.  Is

The reasons have been all explained, but judging on your lack of
comprehension, you must be closely associated with the IBM "culture",
culture as in mikrobes.  If IBM and associates lie on our face again I
will go out of my way to anchor them to the truth, but I forgot, you
won't comprehend that....

>the Win32 market larger?  Yes.  Is OS/2 dead?  No.  Is OS/2 dying?  No.   If

OS/2 is dead, read what IBM told to creative labs.  I posted the related
message from os2-l.  The only market that seems to have some OS/2
acceptance seems to be in Canada, not even USA banks.  A lot of USA
companies are converting their thousands of desktops to NT.  Read the
postings on *.jobs related to OS/2.

>you want to say that no one can succeed by writing software for OS/2, I'm
>one of many examples that will prove you wrong.

Oh please do tell us about your banking and insurance market software
that you sold to your cousins.  If anybody could claim any success on
OS/2 application market, that might be the Keller group, even then,
there is the global village story....

>
>Cheers,
>Brad

Best Regards,

Mustafa Soysal

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mustafa Soysal               (313) 741-1844 Voice                      TeamOS/2
MISTIK Systems               (313) 741-1937 Fax          Author of UnTieCom(tm)
PO Box 7064                                        Authorized Motorola Reseller
Ann Arbor, MI 48107-7064, USA                            os2@mistik.express.net
               Online catalog:  http://www.express.net/mistik/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------