Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!wupost!emory!gwinnett!knex!gess
From: g...@knex.Gwinnett.COM (Gess Shankar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Zachmann's column: PC Mag Jan 28
Message-ID: <7w6HeB1w164w@knex.Gwinnett.COM>
Date: 13 Jan 92 19:13:29 GMT
Organization: Knowledge Exchange, GA
Lines: 52

Zachmann's "Does Best Product Always Win?" column makes interesting
reading. (PC Magazine Jan 28 Issue) Zachmann, one of the few 
journalists who seem to be in the OS/2 camp, seems to be thinking that 
OS/2 will succeed despite dismal marketing. 

With all the discussions in this newsgroup about as-yet officially
undisclosed marketing/advertising plans of IBM on OS/2, I thought that
his comments were topical. Though OS/2 is mentioned not once in the piece,
based on his past columns, he seems to infer that OS/2 will succeed despite
misguided marketing. (Mind you, I am making the assumption that that is
what he is implying. But nobody died and made me mindreader...)

He concludes, ".... excellent products are likely to succeed eventually,
despite mediocre marketing." He cites the example of DesqView, Brief etc.,
which succeeded despite bad or no marketing, due to the fact that the 
products satisfied user needs.

The problem I have with this argument is that products like DesqView,
Brief etc., did not have to contend with 'big hype' advertising of an
already popular product. I believe that despite its technical merits,
OS/2 has to be promoted in all major areas. (1) MIS, which is mostly
IBM's turf and perhaps it is most comfortable with (2) End User community,
not just in Corporate sectors, but in small business as well as home
users and (3) the Developer/Programming community including schools,
Universities and small developers. Each of these is essential for fueling
the growth and acceptance of the OS/2.

No one buys an OS for buying the best OS. People buy the platform, which
allows them to do their work, in which applications abound to solve their
problems, and yes, because of all the hype too.

Targeting the MIS types makes them aware of OS/2 benefits. Targeting
users makes the job of MIS easier. Targeting developers/programmers and
making cheap tools available generates applications, which in turn makes
the users want to look at OS/2. While Windows compatibility brings in many
applictions, native mode OS/2 and PM application solutions should bring
increased productivity and ease of use. 

So I think that IBM should view the product as a retail product and market
it as such. Otherwise the merits of the product may get buried under the
Windows 3.1 promotion blitz that Micro$oft is supposed to be planning.

Perhaps there is something in the name too. "/2" does not seem to be fly.
PS/2.... did not have the success the "AT" had. No wonder Microsoft decided
to call OS/2 derivatives as "NT" and not OS/3, which somehow carried the
baggage of OS/2. Perhaps IBM should have called it "IT" for Integrating
Technology.....

GeSS
--
Gess Shankar      |<><>|Internet: g...@knex.Gwinnett.COM                |<><>|
Knowledge Exchange|<><>|{rutgers,ogicse,gatech}!emory!gwinnett!knex!gess|<><>|