🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5gc3dg$lu4@client2.news.psi.net>, os2@mistik.express.net 
says...
> In article <5g93c3$1u2$2@ordeal.cts.com>, Will Rose <cwr@cts.com> wrote:
> >David Charlap (david@visix.com) wrote:
> >: Michael Perry <mperry@basin.com> wrote:
> >: > 
> >: >One hopes with all these "statistics" bantered about that they decide to 
> >: >tend to their own backyard and make their own suite of applications a 
> >: >powerful alternative instead of just an alternative.
> >
> >: And I sppose you'll want them to devote 10,000+ man-hours to the
> >: project, and you'll want IBM to give it away for free - thus running
> >: all the OS/2 app suite vendors out of business.
> >
> >: Then you'll complain that there aren't any apps.
> >
> >Why on earth do you say this?  Lotus have dragged their feet for
> 
> He knows about the marketplace...so do I...is isn't there....
> 
> If you don't mind David, tell us how many peoople registered your mine
> sweeper game for OS/2?  Got to be at least one person which was me...
> 
> UnTieCom(tm) got about 200 customers at most, a lot of them not regisreted. 
> I haven't compiled the exact numbers.
> 
> Describe went under, and I hear Stardock is complaining....
> 
> >years on OS/2 apps, and plan to drag them for a few more, and you
> >are *defending* them?  If they'd said from the beginning "We don't
> 
> He is pointing out reality....Keep in mind, IBM owns Lotus and controls
> the development....IBM also knows how many copies of Lotus Smartsuite
> for OS/2 has been sold and registered by now.  IBM also knows how many
> people have purchased it in advance last year.  And IBM has decided that
> it is more beneficial to put out the other versions first....
> 
> >give a stuff about OS/2, never have, never will" at least customers
> >would have known where they stood, and another company might have
> >been able to take up the slack.  As it is, there are still no really
> >effective office suites for OS/2, tho' you can hack together
> >substitutes; and I suspect that's a large part of why OS/2 is dead
> 
> I agree with that....Let's move on to Windows as our finances permit.
> 
> >in the water.  A decent native office suite, a couple of years ago,
> >might actually have saved Warp 3.0; it had almost everything else.
> 
> Well, I do have the Smartsuite that came out initially.
> 
> >
> >Will
> >cwr@crash.cts.com
> >
> 
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mustafa Soysal               (313) 741-1844 Voice                      TeamOS/2
> MISTIK Systems               (313) 741-1937 Fax          Author of UnTieCom(tm)
> PO Box 7064                                        Authorised Motorola Reseller
> Ann Arbor, MI 48107-7064, USA                            os2@mistik.express.net
>                Online catalog:  http://www.express.net/mistik/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
I agree with your statements and what you have described; what I dont 
agree with is the summation that we must "settle" for some less than 
average product or move on to "windows as finances permit".  This is not 
a reality that encompasses my thoughts.  We as OS/2 users should have a 
suite of applications that represent the best that developers, marketers, 
and business development persons can deliver.  I understand who owns 
what.  
Do people actually believe that we should settle for Lotus and IBM when 
there are alternatives that will be available?  If people buy a 
productivity application that does not make them productive what does 
that add to the value of the marketplace.  How many people I wonder have 
bought Colorworks?
I also respectfully disagree that we should all just move.  What does 
that give to the marketplace?  I use a few different solutions and am 
always in the market for more.  Why should people buy aolutions when they 
do not keep pace with development in allied areas?  
 
-- 
Michael E. Perry
mperry@basin.com