🚀 go-pugleaf

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
towards the fortune 500-type organizations.  Sure, they toyed with the
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
SOHO/consumer efforts have always been a lower priority, looking at the
history of OS/2.

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
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 
to disparage it (and OS/2 users, on occasion), for some unknown reason.  Is
the Win32 market larger?  Yes.  Is OS/2 dead?  No.  Is OS/2 dying?  No.   If
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.

Cheers,
Brad