🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <333035DE.89B@ibm.net>, djlarue@ibm.net wrote:
>Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> 
>> In article <5gmiuh$bfd@dopey.magg.net>, badair@magg.net wrote:
>> >I would expect that if OMG goes for JavaBeans then OpenDoc (as it is now) is
>> >dead.
>> 
>> >When I first read the PC Week article I was disturbed, but if they use the
>> >OpenDoc technology to enhance JavaBeans they could get it to be as good as
>> >OpenDoc AND have the advantage of haveing code that can run on any system.
>> 
>> >So it shouldn't be that bad, after all JavaBeans is still based off of the
>> >same foundation, CORBA. Of course this will be bad for the small companies
>> >that started OpenDoc development.
>> 
>> >JavaBeans will also have the advantage of being promoted by Netscape and
> Sun,
>> >not just IBM. This will give it a MUCH better chance of succeding over
>> >HacktiveX.
>> 
>> Isn't anyone concerned that IBM never actually seems to *DELIVER* any new
>> technologies?
>> 
>> It seems to take IBM so long to develop new technologies that by the time
> they
>> are even half done they are already obsolete.  Thus, IBM is always in a state
>> of canibalizing prior technology to try to get their next new technology
> (that
>> also won't make it out in time).
>> 
>> There are several examples:
>> 
>> WP/OS, OS/2 PPC, Taligent, OpenDoc, etc.. off the top of my head...
>> 
>> Why is this?
>Because IBM seems to wait and release a product that a company
>can use. How would IBM look if they released incomplete software
>and its corporate customers couldn't use it or worst, they lost
>money or lives because of it? Like Paul Mason, IBM tends to sell
>not SOFTWARE before its time. Unlike Microsoft that releases the
>PR way before the alpha is available and then sells the beta as
>version 1.0. Soon there are soooo many fixes that within a year
>the product is at version 3.0 or 4.0! Look at Internet Explorer 
>and Exchange for examples.

I don't understand how this translates to products that are scrapped and 
killed prior to their release.

IE went through real product lifetimes in each iteration.  I don't understand 
your point.

Exchange was released at version 4. There were several iterations of exchange 
used internally to MS.  Exchange was first designed to be used by the 
microsoft network.

It got plenty of testing internally and externally before it was released.