Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!
news.mit.edu!mmshah
From: mms...@im.lcs.mit.edu (Milan Shah)
Subject: New York Times article - What's going on?
Message-ID: <MMSHAH.92Feb28185236@im5.lcs.mit.edu>
Sender: n...@athena.mit.edu (News system)
Nntp-Posting-Host: im5.lcs.mit.edu
Organization: MIT Lab for Computer Science
Distribution: comp
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1992 23:52:36 GMT
Lines: 66
I am posting an excerpt of an article that appeared in the Business
Day section of The New York Times, Feb 28, 1992. I post this
without permission and without any pretense of transcription
accuracy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Software Detente for I.B.M
Microsoft Rivalry Being Played Down
TUCSON, Ariz., Feb 26 - I.B.M. has quietly retreated from its
loudly announced plan to battle the Microsoft Corporation for
leadership of the personal computer software industry. I.B.M.'s
decision to avoid thrusting its OS/2 program into direct
competition with Microsoft's Windows means that Microsoft can
count on the continuing allegiance of hundreds of computer
makers and software publishers, and millions of users.
The I.B.M. executive who took charge of OS/2 marketing activities
in December is sounding a more conciliatory theme. "I'm not the
kind of person who enjoys bashing Microsoft," Fernand B. Sarrat
said Tuesday. "Windows is a very successful product and I accept
that. I'm not going to buck the trend of Windows. I want to
ride with it."
The Internation Business Machines Corporation and Microsoft,
former partners, had been heading toward a showdown over
operating-system software that controls a computer's basic
functions. Both companies have promised soon to release new,
long-overdue versions of these programs that are supposed to make
personal computers much more powerful and easy to use.
... (edited)
But I.B.M. executives have begun playing down the rivalry and
promoting more modest goals, a reversal noted by others in the
business. "Whatever happened to the Blue Ninja?" said Terry
Garnett and executive at Oracle, a San Mateo, Calif. software
developer.
... (edited)
And Mr. Sarrat adopted a much friendlier tone than that of his
predecessor, Joseph Guglielmi, who was named chief executive of
Taligent, the I.B.M.-Apple Computer joint venture, this week. In
and interview Tuesday, Mr. Sarrat said that his sales campaign
would initially focus on the company's largest corporate
customers, which have been involved in the field testing of OS/2
2.0
"I don't view Microsoft as a direct competitor," he said. Instead,
Mr. Sarrat said he merely wanted to help customers get the most
from their computers. "I'm more into developing system software
that takes advantage of the most advanced hardware," he said,
suggesting that OS/2 will make its biggest impact in future
multimedia applications that integrate text, images, and sound.
... (edited)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
So, what does everyone think?
Milan
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!uchinews!ellis!sip1
From: s...@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: New York Times article - What's going on?
Message-ID: <1992Feb29.024955.2496@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: n...@uchinews.uchicago.edu (News System)
Reply-To: s...@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
References: <MMSHAH.92Feb28185236@im5.lcs.mit.edu>
Distribution: comp
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 1992 02:49:55 GMT
In article <MMSHAH.92Feb28185...@im5.lcs.mit.edu>
mms...@im.lcs.mit.edu (Milan Shah) writes:
>Software Detente for I.B.M
>Microsoft Rivalry Being Played Down
>TUCSON, Ariz., Feb 26 - I.B.M. has quietly retreated from its
>loudly announced plan to battle the Microsoft Corporation for
>leadership of the personal computer software industry. I.B.M.'s
>decision to avoid thrusting its OS/2 program into direct
>competition with Microsoft's Windows means that Microsoft can
>count on the continuing allegiance of hundreds of computer
>makers and software publishers, and millions of users.
That's an unwarranted introduction, I think. A bit too strong. Read
on.
>The I.B.M. executive who took charge of OS/2 marketing activities
>in December is sounding a more conciliatory theme. "I'm not the
>kind of person who enjoys bashing Microsoft," Fernand B. Sarrat
>said Tuesday. "Windows is a very successful product and I accept
>that. I'm not going to buck the trend of Windows. I want to
>ride with it."
>But I.B.M. executives have begun playing down the rivalry and
>promoting more modest goals, a reversal noted by others in the
>business. "Whatever happened to the Blue Ninja?" said Terry
>Garnett and executive at Oracle, a San Mateo, Calif. software
>developer.
>"I don't view Microsoft as a direct competitor," he said. Instead,
>Mr. Sarrat said he merely wanted to help customers get the most
>from their computers. "I'm more into developing system software
>that takes advantage of the most advanced hardware," he said,
>suggesting that OS/2 will make its biggest impact in future
>multimedia applications that integrate text, images, and sound.
Nothing new here as far as I can see. I'm a bit surprised it ended up
in the New York Times, though. Hardly earth shattering, and no new
news.
Will IBM be marketing OS/2 to the home/small business user?
Absolutely. (Many other extremely recent press stories have attested
to this fact.) Do they want to destroy Windows? Of course not.
They've always viewed Windows as the logical stepping stone to OS/2.
They've maintained that strategy consistently. Windows is a proper
solution for many people. (Note the quote: "I want to ride with it
[Windows].")
It sounds like he's saying, "If you want to use Windows 3.x, that's
fine. When you're ready to step up to OS/2 2.0, we'll be there for
you, and you won't be disappointed." That's sensible, isn't it?
OS/2 2.0 _needs_ Windows. Windows 3.0 has encouraged people to
upgrade their machines, to explore the graphical user interface, to
experiment with multitasking (albeit crudely), and to become more
proficient with the mouse. It will continue to do so for a long time
to come.
--
Timothy F. Sipples Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
s...@ellis.uchicago.edu List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics 130.57.4.1, directory os2/faq, or via netmail
Univ. of Chicago 60637 from LISTS...@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!smsmith
From: smsm...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Smith)
Subject: Re: New York Times article - What's going on?
Message-ID: <1992Mar1.001123.9770@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: n...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: comp
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 1992 00:11:23 GMT
Lines: 46
Timothy Sipples (s...@midway.uchicago.edu) writes:
>
>OS/2 2.0 _needs_ Windows. Windows 3.0 has encouraged people to
>upgrade their machines, to explore the graphical user interface, to
>experiment with multitasking (albeit crudely), and to become more
>proficient with the mouse. It will continue to do so for a long time
>to come.
The way that the article sounded to me was FAR different than what
IBM has been telling us all along. As another person said, "What
happened to the Blue Ninja?" Hopefully what Terry Turner and
Bob Cain said about this news release in other posts is true (that
IBM is still targetting end users aggressively, and that IBM is trying
to cater to both end users and corporations be choosing their words
accordingly).
IBM can't be passive about this. Look at all the excitement there has
been over the "new IBM" in the past 6 months! IBM's performance at
the Windows & OS/2 Conference in January got a LOT of people excited
about OS/2 because they were willing to even make jokes about Windows
and compare OS/2 to Windows in demonstrations. This zeal is what IBM
has needed for years in their marketing. Look at all the trouble
Bert Moshier went to when he composed his long letter to IBM about
IBM's failure to market OS/2 aggressively. Bert said in his letter:
"This letter's purpose is to help get IBM's OS/2 marketing and
advertising permission to be "hungry," innovative and aggressive.
Free them from the shackles of IBM's past."
I, for one, am primarily interested in OS/2 as an OPTION to running
DOS/Windows on my system, and I think OS/2's BIGGEST selling point
is that it really IS a better DOS than DOS and a better Windows than
Windows. I do not see how IBM could possibly sit back and say that
Windows is just fine for 386/486 machines when OS/2 is obviously so
much better. These two products MUST compete, because if IBM lets
Windows users continue on their merry way by encouraging them to
continue to run Windows because it's a fine OS and because OS/2 is
not competing with it (which is basically what was stated in the
news release!), then we might as well say "adios OS/2" (as another
poster put it).
Steve Smith | __|__ | " #*&<-[89s]*(k#$@-_=//a2$]'+=.(2_&*%>,,@
<smsm...@magnus.acs. | | | {7%*@,..":27g)-=,#*:.#,/6&1*.4-,l@#9:-) "
ohio-state.edu> | | |
BTW, WYSInaWYG | | | --witty.saying.ARC
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!uchinews!ellis!sip1
From: s...@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: New York Times article - What's going on?
Message-ID: <1992Mar1.010225.6024@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: n...@uchinews.uchicago.edu (News System)
Reply-To: s...@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
References: <1992Mar1.001123.9770@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Distribution: comp
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 1992 01:02:25 GMT
In article <1992Mar1.001123.9...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
smsm...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Smith) writes:
>The way that the article sounded to me was FAR different than what
>IBM has been telling us all along. As another person said, "What
>happened to the Blue Ninja?" Hopefully what Terry Turner and
>Bob Cain said about this news release in other posts is true (that
>IBM is still targetting end users aggressively, and that IBM is trying
>to cater to both end users and corporations be choosing their words
>accordingly).
IBM has a lot of people to keep happy. If this is a conscious effort,
I think they're doing the right thing. Like politicians (!), when
speaking to the Veterans of Foreign Wars you don't discuss foreign
aid. However, when you're speaking to the Institute for International
Releations, then you start talking about development grants to third
world countries. The message should be tailored to the audience.
There are a few IBM customers who are terrified that somehow the
machines on the network that are underpowered and are presently
running Windows won't get along with the other networked machines
running OS/2. Granted, these are the folks that were in attendance in
great numbers at the recent meeting I went to in Chicago ("Gee, that's
pretty neat. Now how do we disable it?"), but they also read the New
York Times. :-)
>I, for one, am primarily interested in OS/2 as an OPTION to running
>DOS/Windows on my system, and I think OS/2's BIGGEST selling point
>is that it really IS a better DOS than DOS and a better Windows than
>Windows. I do not see how IBM could possibly sit back and say that
>Windows is just fine for 386/486 machines when OS/2 is obviously so
>much better. These two products MUST compete, because if IBM lets
>Windows users continue on their merry way by encouraging them to
>continue to run Windows because it's a fine OS and because OS/2 is
>not competing with it (which is basically what was stated in the
>news release!), then we might as well say "adios OS/2" (as another
>poster put it).
My point was that OS/2 actually needs Windows. Why? What are all the
286 owners (and 386SX owners with 2 MB or less) going to run? :-)
--
Timothy F. Sipples Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
s...@ellis.uchicago.edu List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics 130.57.4.1, directory os2/faq, or via netmail
Univ. of Chicago 60637 from LISTS...@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!think.com!linus!philabs!castle!scifi!watson!yktnews!admin!news
From: Larry Margolis <marg...@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: New York Times article - What's going on?
Sender: n...@watson.ibm.com (NNTP News Poster)
Message-ID: <1992Mar04.002121.40746@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1992 00:21:21 GMT
Distribution: comp
Reply-To: marg...@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Nntp-Posting-Host: lamail.watson.ibm.com
Organization: The Village Waterbed
In <1992Mar1.010225.6...@midway.uchicago.edu> s...@ellis.uchicago.edu
(Timothy F. Sipples) writes:
>
> My point was that OS/2 actually needs Windows. Why?
Beats me. :-)
> What are all the 286 owners going to run? :-)
I've been running OS/2 1.x for years. Why would I want to downgrade
to Windows? :-)
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), marg...@watson.IBM.com (Internet)