Autor: Przemysław Pawełczyk (warpman_at_poczta.fm)
Data: Sat 13 May 2000 - 13:52:33 MET DST
Hi,
Podobno część z Was się nudzi. Proponuję uważną lekturę listów od osób,
które COŚ wiedzą, a nie spekulują o wyższości... tego czy tamtego.
Miłej lektury. PP.
==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE==================
=> Received: (qmail 26279 invoked from network); 12 May 2000 17:09:45 -0000
=> Received: from mailer.bmtmicro.net (206.25.203.5)
=> by poczta.fm with SMTP; 12 May 2000 17:09:45 -0000
=> Received: from mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net ([204.127.131.49])
=> by mailer.bmtmicro.net (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223
=> ID# 0-58942U1100L200S0V35) with ESMTP id net
=> for <os2user_at_os2ss.com>; Fri, 12 May 2000 13:01:34 -0400
=> Received: from 147.denver-26-27rs.co.dial-access.att.net ([12.74.82.147])
=> by mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net
=> (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP
=> id <20000512170640.BQLH2023.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net_at_147.denver-26-27rs.co.dia>
=> for <os2user_at_os2ss.com>; Fri, 12 May 2000 17:06:40 +0000
=> From: "Karen Mansbridge-Wood" <karen.l.mansbridge-wood_at_worldnet.att.net>
=> To: "os2user_at_os2ss.com" <os2user_at_os2ss.com>
=> Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 11:06:39 -0600 (MDT)
=> Priority: Normal
=> X-Mailer: PMMail 2.10.2010 for OS/2 Warp 4.05
=> In-Reply-To: <391C35D4.3D272357_at_attglobal.net>
=> MIME-Version: 1.0
=> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
=> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
=> Subject: Re: IBM e-business and Software News Alert, 2000 Issue 13
=> Message-Id: <20000512170640.BQLH2023.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net_at_147.denver-26-27rs.co.dia>
=> Errors-To: admin_at_bmtmicro.net
=> Reply-To: os2user_at_os2ss.com
=>
On Fri, 12 May 2000 12:48:21 -0400, James C. Gorman, Ph.D.
wrote:
>Karen,
>
>I had the same question as Sean.
>
>Thank you for addressing it.
I wish I could provide more information than I have, but I
really can't.
>I also appreciate your "friendship" issue, and marvelled at how you walked the
>"tightrope" between documenting the source of your reflections and maintaining
>confidentiality.
It is terribly difficult. I really shouldn't say anything at
all, but it just burns me up to listen to arguments that suggest
the development team just *can't* do it, or that they aren't
*interested* in doing it. Or that OS/2 is dead when it is so
far from being dead you can't begin to imagine it.
The DOJ case against MS has really made a lot of things very
difficult for IBM. In the long run, it is a more important case
than anyone really imagines, and the talk about how they won't
do this or that because MS is so important holds absolutely no
water at all. IBM isn't the one in serious trouble right now.
MS is. MS *is* going to lose its monopoly status, and the
result of the court rulings is going to significantly impact the
industry in ways most of us cannot even imagine yet. And no
matter *what* MS says about it, the changes that are coming are
good news for everyone except MS itself. The only thing that
has to happen right now is that MS' power in the marketplace has
to be broken. Not their position of dominance, but their
ability to hold that position by resorting to illegal and
unethical business practices. The world will still be
predominantly MS, but MS won't have the power to force its will
on the industry, and without that power, its dominance will be
significantly reduced.
As IBM moves away from the policy of trying to compel software
developers to develop to the OS/2 API the degree of concern
software developers have about IBM's intentions will begin to
ease. With access to platform independent software to keep OS/2
alive, and the ability to run software that the rest of the
world can run, OS/2 is due to make a real comeback in marketing
terms. When OS/2 is selling well again because there will be
nothing to prevent it from selling well again, even the
thickheaded Lou Gerstner will eventually understand that there
is money to be made in it. Software companies will also realise
that there is money to be made in developing OS/2 software.
Reversing the mistakes of the past is going to be an incremental
process. Not everyone at IBM is pro-OS/2. Gerstner could care
less. But he cares about money. He'll support the
implementation of win32 code in OS/2 because he can sit back and
tell himself it will smooth the transition to Windows. The
development team will support it because it will remove one more
practical obstacle to making OS/2 successful. The policy makers
don't dictate outcome independent of market considerations. They
will go where the money is, and in the future there is still a
lot of money to be made out of OS/2.
Karen
___________________________________________________________
IBM *does* listen to its customers. If you support OS/2, tell IBM:
http://www.ibm.com/scripts/email-lvg.pl
http://www2.software.ibm.com/os/warp/webreqs.nsf/page1?OpenForm
___________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------
The OS/2 Users Mailing List from the OS/2 Supersite
To unsubscribe go to
http://mailer.falcon-net.net:8080/guest/RemoteListSummary/os2user_list
REMEMBER: DON'T POST ATTACHMENTS TO THE LIST ITSELF.
===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE===================
To archiwum zostało wygenerowane przez hypermail 2.1.7 : Tue 18 May 2004 - 15:27:18 MET DST