Autor: Przemysław Pawełczyk (warpman_at_friko5.onet.pl)
Data: Wed 07 Oct 1998 - 00:41:39 MET DST
Bez komentarzy.
Warpman
==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE==================
on 10/05/98 "Wolfgang Becker" <wobecke_at_ibm.net> stated:
**snip**
>Actually, I don't understand why there's such a lot of excitement and
>anger about this. In my opinion, the document just repeats what IBM have
>been telling us for years - that they don't care about OS/2, SOHO users,
>and the world in general.
Actually I did see something 'new'. New for me anyway.
*****from the document*****
Given these factors, we now see OS/2 as a transitional platform
over
the
next three years. Eventually, customers will have to move to
another
platform or accept a lower level of function if they stay on OS/2.
We
will
provide very clear direction to our customers, including what we
are
and
are not going to do to OS/2. We are asking customers to make a
choice:
follow IBM's preferred path toward the Java application model,
I*net
exploitation, and server-managed clients using a range of servers
and
clients or follow Microsoft's Win32/WinNT path in a more
traditional
client/server approach. We will encourage IBM middleware,
solutions,
and services in either choice. Over time, the choice that the
customer has
becomes increasingly differentiated.
***************************
I had always thought that if a company was big enough, and they used
OS/2,
they could rely on IBM to support them, the way I read this is, if a
company doesn't buy into the network computing model IBM has, then
tough
beans. No matter how big the company is. What ever happened to big
Lou's
promise to support the platform for 10 more years? I guess that begs to
offer the definition of 'support'.
>Their 'strategy' is going to fall apart on them for a couple of reasons,
>I believe: 1. While it may be true that large companies will embrace the
>NC stragety and everything it entails, I doubt very much that they'll
>return to the IBM fold after having gone NT - as advised by IBM!
My question is, what does IBM think Microsoft is going to do with the
millions of dollars in business that IBM sells for them? Make NT
better?
Or market to IBM big iron customers?
>2. While it may be true that the 'total cost of ownership' (an
>accountant's fiction if I ever saw one - take a piece of paper, industry
>brochures, their price lists, and start doing numbers (preferably before
>you start yelling, folks!) _appears_ to be lower if you use servers and
>dumb terminals, in the middle and long run, you'll start paying real
>money real soon - and you'll _never_ be able to stop. Therefore, I
>believe that the NC model is doomed.
Not to mention peoples memories of 'the network is down' problems. With
the NC model, kill the network, kill everyone's productivity.
Admittedly,
networks and network servers are getting better every day. Still,
without
a network, people using fat clients can still do 'most' of their work.
And
the NC leaves out all the industry that really does need a client. NCs
have their place, but they are not the answer for everyone all of the
time. And they have yet to be a proven technology in a lot of peoples
minds.
>3. I have serious concerns about the security issues involved in the
>network computing environment - after all, it's been demonstrated time
>and again that _all_ security systems can and _will_ be breached.
Agreed.
>4. The typical SOHO user is a _very_ conservative animal - and his/her
>purse isn't all that fat. Can anybody _really_ imagine staying online
>all day, every day, all year long to do his/her work, because all he/she
>has is a dumb terminal to work with? Mind you, I'm not talking about
>phone charges (you folks in the US would start screaming if you had to
>pay phone charges in Germany) - I'm talking about bandwidth. 5. Java.
>This simply won't work, it doesn't work today - or is there someone on
>this list who got the HotJava Brower running under OS/2? Windoze? 'Write
>once, run everywhere' is M$speak, hype, bullshit. Existing Java
>applications are written to specific platforms - and this won't change,
>at least not in the foreseeable future.
SOHO doesn't count in IBMs numbers. No matter that windows had the
greatest boost to it's acceptance by selling to the folks at home, and
the
students, who take their experience and habits with them to work. I
work
in the field of factory automation, and the primary player here is
Allen
Bradley. Not because it's the best, of the lest expensive, or the most
innovative, but a lot of their market share comes from the fact that AB
gives equipment to every collage and technical school that has a course
on
using PLCs. New students turn into new engineers that turn into new
managers. No one ever got fired for buying Allen Bradly.
> 6. JavaOS. Anybody taking bets on the release date? Like _never_?
Oh, I think it will happen, but there is a whole lot of software that
is
used today, and will be used tomorrow, and will be used for a long time
before the JavaOS is a real threat to Microsoft. The only real threat
would be a platform that can run Java, native code, and windows
software
seemlessly. ( and the platform would have to be supported by the
company
that produces it )
>Finally: I will most assuredly not take the route IBM wants me to take.
>I'll hang on to OS/2 for as long as I can - all the time looking for
>tools to do more and more of my job under Linux. I've reached the point
>where I dare utter the prophecy that LInux will be our future, because
>our preferred OS will be killed by its creator. How's that for irony?
I agree here to. I had always thought that as long as IBM was
supporting
it's global 1000, I would just ride the coat-tails and use the OS that
I
have found to serve me best. But seeing as it appears the IBM is going
to
dump on them too, what other choice do we have?
If I were one of IBM big customers, after learning their plans for the
best OS available, I would start to wonder how secure an investment in
DB/2 would be? Or notes, or AIX or any of IBM's other cash cows. The
winds of change often do, and given a few quarters of downturn in any
one
of those products could spell it's abandonment.
The really sad part about all of this document it that it shows a
complete
lack of commitment from IBM for IBM.
I am a techie sort of person, so there are times when I will tell a
customer that using someone else's component would solve his problem
better than something that I have would. If I were a salesman, I
would
pitch every solution I had before I would dream of telling a customer
that
he should buy something from my competitor.
Today, I called up my local IBM office and asked for a recommendation
for
a little office network. One server, 15 to 20 clients. I was impressed
that IBM knew that we already had a RS/6000 in the office, but I
explained
that it was going to be attached, but not used for anything other that
a
database server.
After talking to a couple people, and giving what I thought was a
typical
usage for what our office would need, the solution I was given was an
NT
server, with Win98 clients and MS office. I asked about OS/2 and lotus,
and was told that they could be used ( and sold ), but that support was
not available ( in Dayton ),and the cost would be higher. I was also
told
that OS/2 v4 was the last version that would be made available, it
would
not be kept current, and the technology was not as good as NT 4.
I am no expert in these things, but if IBM is to survive, it really
needs
to change the company way of thinking.
First, and this should be very simple, really, IBM needs to support
IBM.
If they want to service customers running NT, fine. But do that as a
last
resort, not the first.
IBM should be pushing Java to K-12. They should be offering
free networking classes to collage kids. They should be giving hardware
and software to the technical schools. The software should be 100% IBM
software.
They need to preload their own stuff on their own computers. They need
to
make alphaworks release OS/2 and AIX versions before NT. Every person
in
the company should be thinking 'sell IBM'.
I don't think much of Microsoft as a company, but their "Windows
Everywhere" strategy is to be admired.
If someone takes the blinders off the management at IBM sometime soon,
and
if they take their noses off the quarterly bottom line for just a
moment,
OS/2 could still be a mean to their ends. Support OS/2 before NT. Give
it
the ability to run NT programs, get a real advertising company to sell
it,
but most of all, get the rest of the damn company to realize that it
exists.
It will be a whole lot easier to switch their customers from OS/2 into
the
network computing model than it will be to switch them from Windows.
In the document where it is noted that OS/2 server shipments are down,
and
the sales revenue is drying up, I swear, it almost sounds like they are
whining about it.
Like duh, IBM.
Sorry for the rant.
I'll go back to sleep now.
_________________________________________________
TeamOS/2 RexxLA V.O.I.C.E
"Yes, Virginia, there is a better choice."
Warpstock '98 http://www.warpstock.org
------------------------------------------------------------------
The OS/2 Users Mailing List from the OS/2 Supersite
To unsubscribe go to
http://mailer.falcon-net.net:8080/guest/RemoteListSummary/os2user1
REMEMBER: DON'T POST ATTACHMENTS TO THE LIST ITSELF.
------------------------------------------------------------------
===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE===================
============================= OS/2 WARP 4ever
Przemysław Pawełczyk (Warpman) Freelance journalist
Os. Centrum B 1/89 Phone +48 12 642-13-00
31-927 Kraków mailto:warpman_at_friko5.onet.pl
Poland http://friko5.onet.pl/kr/warpman/
=============================================
To archiwum zostało wygenerowane przez hypermail 2.1.7 : Tue 18 May 2004 - 15:18:27 MET DST