IBM Kills OS/2 for PPC, Warp for PC now the focus (WSJ 1/26/96)

8 views
Skip to first unread message

P. Pete Chong

unread,
Jan 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/26/96
to
WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.


Pete
--
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Happy_Family
http://www.gonzaga.edu

Home, Sweet Home.

Steve Withers

unread,
Jan 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/26/96
to
In article <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> wrote:
>WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
>terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
>that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.

Lou Gerstner has said it over and over:

"Connected consumers".

The future is network-centric (in computing terms, at least).

--
********************************************************
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand
steve....@ibm.net / swit...@vnet.ibm.com
Canadian since '58 / Kiwi since '87 / OS2 since '92
Life just keeps getting better!
********************************************************

soyring

unread,
Jan 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/26/96
to
In <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> writes:
>WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
>terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
>that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.
>
>
>Pete
>--


I have not read the subject article, but if what you say of the Wall
Street Journal article is accurate, then the WSJ is wrong.

In no way is the work on the PowerPC version of OS/2 Warp
terminated. All we said to writers at the Wall Street Journal
(as well as to other members of the media) is what we described
to IBM employees earlier this week.

What we said is that our development focus in 1996 will be on
enhancing OS/2 Warp as both a client operating system (the
MERLIN project) and as a server operating system (the OS/2 Warp
Server projects) on the Intel and Intel-compatible platforms. We
are not planning additional releases of the OS/2 Warp family on the
PowerPC platform during 1996 -- as we *just* released in
late December 1995 the OS/2 Warp (PowerPC Edition) product.

During 1996 and beyond, we plan to grow our market share for OS/2
Warp both as a client operating system and as a server operating
system on x86 PC's. And we will be doing this aggressively.
We have just not announced future releases on the PowerPC
platform.

In no way should our announcement imply that we are backing away
from the PowerPC.

John

Bill Oconnor

unread,
Jan 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/26/96
to
In article <4eb1dg$1p...@ausnews.austin.ibm.com>,

soyring@ wrote:
>In <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong"
<ch...@cet.com> writes:

>>WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
>>terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
>>that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.

>I have not read the subject article, but if what you say of the Wall


>Street Journal article is accurate, then the WSJ is wrong.

John, that's just about the way the story was reported by the WSJ.
I even heard it on BBR (Bloomberg Business Radio) reporting it
just as the WSJ did. They were quoting the WSJ.

>In no way is the work on the PowerPC version of OS/2 Warp
>terminated. All we said to writers at the Wall Street Journal
>(as well as to other members of the media) is what we described
>to IBM employees earlier this week.

>What we said is that our development focus in 1996 will be on
>enhancing OS/2 Warp as both a client operating system (the
>MERLIN project) and as a server operating system (the OS/2 Warp
>Server projects) on the Intel and Intel-compatible platforms. We
>are not planning additional releases of the OS/2 Warp family on the
>PowerPC platform during 1996 -- as we *just* released in
>late December 1995 the OS/2 Warp (PowerPC Edition) product.

That's about the reaction that I had when I first read, and then
heard that report. I was not too surprised at the negative slant
that was put on this news. The WSJ seems to have a track record
of putting a negative bent on any tidbit of info coming from IBM.
One can only wonder why?


>During 1996 and beyond, we plan to grow our market share for OS/2
>Warp both as a client operating system and as a server operating
>system on x86 PC's. And we will be doing this aggressively.
>We have just not announced future releases on the PowerPC
>platform.

>In no way should our announcement imply that we are backing away
>from the PowerPC.


The WSJ could just as easily have reported that, IBM feels that
their new OS/2 for the PPC is so solid that there will be no need
for further enhancements in 1996.

I wonder why they didn't do THAT!


BTW, Microsoft recently announced there will be no major improvemnt
for Win 95 in 1996. Is anyone here aware of the WSJ reporting that
Microsoft "officilly terminated" Win 95? If so, I'd like to hear
from you.


>John


--

Bill OConnor

* When the NEWS is bad! -- SHOOT the messenger! *

Jeff Carty

unread,
Jan 27, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/27/96
to
In <UIaCxYWC...@ibm.net>, steve....@ibm.net (Steve Withers) writes:

>In article <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> wrote:
>>WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
>>terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
>>that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.
>
>Lou Gerstner has said it over and over:
>
>"Connected consumers".
>
>The future is network-centric (in computing terms, at least).

But the announcment amounts to a fairly massive re-positioning for the
PPC chip, and IBM OSes generally, no?
IBM had meant PPC to challenge Intel, for both client and server markets.
To do that, PPC had to have OS/2, as well as NT and AIX. Now it only has
NT and AIX. Which means it is basically just a server system (I don't
believe large numbers will use NT or AIX as client) - and one that competes
more or less AGAINST OS/2 (as a server system). OS/2 has definitely taken
a hit here. (Notwithstanding the fact that OS/2 has seen other recent
events break in its favor.)

Jeff


Alex Burgos

unread,
Jan 27, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/27/96
to
In article <4ebmi9$e...@ausnews.austin.ibm.com>, soyring@ wrote:
>In <4ebase$4...@nexen.nexen.com>, Ted Warren <warren> writes:
>>John,
>>
>>It's very refreshing to hear a voice from IBM directly in this group.
>>I read the article on OS/2 PPC and there are some quotes that present
>>a somewhat different picture than your post:
>
>Ted, my message was intended to communcate that OS/2 Warp for
>PowerPC is *not dead*, *not shelved* and *not terminated* as
>some reports have indicated. We will continue to sell, service and
>support OS/2 Warp for the PowerPC. It's just that our primary
>development and marketing focus in *1996* will be on the OS/2
>Warp family running on the x86 series of processors.
>
>We have had tremendous recent success selling OS/2 Warp on
>x86. We will grow that success by focusing like a laser beam
>our resources on what needs to get done in terms of development
>and marketing to allow the Warp family to continue to gain market
>share -- but at an even more rapid rate -- both as a client (Merlin)
>and as a server (Warp Server, Directory and Security Server, project
>EAGLE, etc) on x86 platforms.
>
>>---------------------
>>.... A spokeswoman said the reason was that "demand hasn't developed for
>>it the way we thought it would."

[... lines deleted ...]

The "journalists" that exist today on the payrolls of WSJ and
NYTimes were at the bottom of their classes when it came to
comprehension.

For a 'splash' article they edited the information to their
benefit.

The editors of WSJ and NYTimes also see fit to not do their
jobs in making sure their agents of information, "journalists",
have factual, usual information in their articles for a
person to utilize.

Sham(e) really in this day of micro-second communication when
a phonecall could have been made to ensure their articles
gave the actual information being related to them by that
'IBM spokesperson'.

Even with acces to IBM "journalists" seem to be lost at their
jobs.

Is it any wonder that they just rather add their byline to
a reprinted press release instead of doing some work.

BTW, many many "old" PCs are still functioning and getting
business done by using OS/2 v2.x and Warp. With a pathetic
3_MegaBytes or 4_MegaBytes of RAM and crummy sub-100_MegaByte
harddrives.

Keep OS/2 going and many more businesses will see that they
do not have to waste money on "new" x86 hardware when there is
an old/new operating system out there able to bring Life to
their "old" intel PC hardware and keep their bottom_lines
clean.

alex burgos

P. Pete Chong

unread,
Jan 27, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/27/96
to
IBM Drops Ambitious Plan to Build
Version of OS/2 for PowerPC Chip

By a Wall Street Journal Staff Reporter

ARMONK, N.Y. -- International Business Machines Corp. is finally
shelving its ambitious three-year effort to create a version of its OS/2
operating system for its PowerPC chip, calling into question its entire
desktop strategy for a chip once intended to challenge Microsoft Corp.
and
Intel Corp.

After denying for months that OS/2 for PowerPC had failed to achieve its
goals and missing numerous shipping dates, officials told employees this
week that IBM planned no further versions for the system in 1996. A


spokeswoman said the reason was that "demand hasn't developed for it the
way we thought it would."

Instead, IBM will focus on developing versions of OS/2 for personal
computers that run on Intel chips. John M. Thompson, IBM's head of
software, added that he doesn't see a huge market for any PowerPC
desktop. "PowerPC was aimed at people who need a lot of power. The
market has moved on and it's developed around Intel on the desktop."
=====
Here is the post, and I hope you are right.

--
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Happy_Family

And now these three remain: faith, hope and love.
But the greatest of these is love.

tho...@ifa.hawaii.edu

unread,
Jan 27, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/27/96
to
P. Pete Chong writes:

> IBM Drops Ambitious Plan to Build
> Version of OS/2 for PowerPC Chip
>
> By a Wall Street Journal Staff Reporter

[SNIP]

> Here is the post, and I hope you are right.

Here's another post:

================================================================================
From: soyring@
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM Supports OS/2 for PPC, Warp for PC now the focus (WSJ 1/26/96)
Date: 26 Jan 1996 17:01:36 GMT
Message-ID: <4eb1dg$1p...@ausnews.austin.ibm.com>
References: <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>
Reply-To: soy...@austin.vnet.ibm.com

In <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> writes:
>WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
>terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
>that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.
>
>

>Pete
>--


I have not read the subject article, but if what you say of the Wall
Street Journal article is accurate, then the WSJ is wrong.

In no way is the work on the PowerPC version of OS/2 Warp


terminated. All we said to writers at the Wall Street Journal
(as well as to other members of the media) is what we described
to IBM employees earlier this week.

What we said is that our development focus in 1996 will be on
enhancing OS/2 Warp as both a client operating system (the
MERLIN project) and as a server operating system (the OS/2 Warp
Server projects) on the Intel and Intel-compatible platforms. We
are not planning additional releases of the OS/2 Warp family on the
PowerPC platform during 1996 -- as we *just* released in
late December 1995 the OS/2 Warp (PowerPC Edition) product.

During 1996 and beyond, we plan to grow our market share for OS/2


Warp both as a client operating system and as a server operating
system on x86 PC's. And we will be doing this aggressively.
We have just not announced future releases on the PowerPC
platform.

In no way should our announcement imply that we are backing away
from the PowerPC.

John


DOMINIC KAILATH

unread,
Jan 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/28/96
to
tho...@ifa.hawaii.edu wrote:
>P. Pete Chong writes:
>
>> IBM Drops Ambitious Plan to Build
>> Version of OS/2 for PowerPC Chip
>>
>> By a Wall Street Journal Staff Reporter
>
>[SNIP]
>
>> Here is the post, and I hope you are right.
>
>Here's another post:
>
>================================================================================
>From: soyring@
>Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
>Subject: Re: IBM Supports OS/2 for PPC, Warp for PC now the focus (WSJ 1/26/96)
>Date: 26 Jan 1996 17:01:36 GMT
>Message-ID: <4eb1dg$1p...@ausnews.austin.ibm.com>
>References: <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>
>Reply-To: soy...@austin.vnet.ibm.com
>
>In <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> writes:
>>WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
>>terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
>>that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.
>>
>>
>>Pete
>>--
>During 1996 and beyond, we plan to grow our market share for OS/2
>Warp both as a client operating system and as a server operating
>system on x86 PC's. And we will be doing this aggressively.
>We have just not announced future releases on the PowerPC
>platform.
>
>In no way should our announcement imply that we are backing away
>from the PowerPC.
>

PowerPC now becomes the latest casualty in the IBMs attempt to
impose a properietory architecture in the microcomputer industry.
The list is getting longer -- microchanel, OS2, PowerPC---

Dominic


Mark Nixon

unread,
Jan 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/28/96
to
In article <4eeqld$j...@merlin.delphi.com>,
DOMINIC KAILATH <Kai...@mci.newscorp.com> wrote:
>>
>>================================================================================
>>From: soyring@

>>During 1996 and beyond, we plan to grow our market share for OS/2
>>Warp both as a client operating system and as a server operating
>>system on x86 PC's. And we will be doing this aggressively.
>>We have just not announced future releases on the PowerPC
>>platform.
>>
>>In no way should our announcement imply that we are backing away
>>from the PowerPC.
>>
>
>PowerPC now becomes the latest casualty in the IBMs attempt to
>impose a properietory architecture in the microcomputer industry.
>The list is getting longer -- microchanel, OS2, PowerPC---
>

Hunh?How the hell did you get that out of what Soyring wrote? Hunh?

WARP for the PowerPC is ported, finished and shipping. And the the
PowerPC is not propietary.

Where do these baitbrains come from?

--
Mark Nixon
----

Un montrealais living in Denmark
Internet: man...@ibm.net
Fidonet :2:234/9...@fidonet.org


Kim Sommer

unread,
Jan 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/28/96
to
soyring@ wrote:

: In <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> writes:
: >WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
: >terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
: >that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.
: >
[snip]
: I have not read the subject article, but if what you say of the Wall
: Street Journal article is accurate, then the WSJ is wrong.
[snip]
: During 1996 and beyond, we plan to grow our market share for OS/2

: Warp both as a client operating system and as a server operating
: system on x86 PC's. And we will be doing this aggressively.
: We have just not announced future releases on the PowerPC
: platform.

Thanx for the update John,

I and probably the rest of the OS/2 supporters who populate this noisy
place we call c.o.o.a are glad that someone from IBM management is
showing an agreesiveness in setting the record straight. Too often in
the past silence has given consent when OS/2 and its future has been
attacked. You have to be a pretty busy fellow but a note dropped here
every now and then couldn't hurt. (hint hint)

FWIW, it seems to me with the PowerPC being an IBM product, getting Warp
Server moved to PPC *soon* would be a Really Good Thing.


Kim
--

Kim A. Sommer - kaso...@intersource.com
-or- kas...@dice.nwscc.sea06.navy.mil
//Team-OS/2, B5, aikido, things that go zoom//

Lesniak

unread,
Jan 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/29/96
to
DOMINIC KAILATH (Kai...@mci.newscorp.com) wrote:

: tho...@ifa.hawaii.edu wrote:
: >P. Pete Chong writes:
: >
: >> IBM Drops Ambitious Plan to Build
: >> Version of OS/2 for PowerPC Chip
: >>
: >> By a Wall Street Journal Staff Reporter
: >
: >[SNIP]
: >
: >> Here is the post, and I hope you are right.
: >
: >Here's another post:
: >
: >================================================================================
: >From: soyring@
: >Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
: >Subject: Re: IBM Supports OS/2 for PPC, Warp for PC now the focus (WSJ 1/26/96)
: >Date: 26 Jan 1996 17:01:36 GMT
: >Message-ID: <4eb1dg$1p...@ausnews.austin.ibm.com>
: >References: <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>
: >Reply-To: soy...@austin.vnet.ibm.com
: >

: >In <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> writes:
: >>WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
: >>terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
: >>that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.
: >>
: >>
: >>Pete
: >>--
: >During 1996 and beyond, we plan to grow our market share for OS/2
: >Warp both as a client operating system and as a server operating
: >system on x86 PC's. And we will be doing this aggressively.
: >We have just not announced future releases on the PowerPC
: >platform.
: >
: >In no way should our announcement imply that we are backing away
: >from the PowerPC.
: >

: PowerPC now becomes the latest casualty in the IBMs attempt to
: impose a properietory architecture in the microcomputer industry.
: The list is getting longer -- microchanel, OS2, PowerPC---

: Dominic

You do realize, do you not, that the PPC is architecture has
been embraced by other companies, that PPC machines run
a variety of operating systems?

Dominic, FYI OS/2 is an operating system, not a "proprietary
architecture". Of course, one could say that DirectX, MAPI,
Blackbird, Internet Explorer, Win32 are proprietary API's
that have fallen victim to Microsoft's latest attempt to
impose a "properietory architecture." Oh, and the list
is getting longer...MSN, WinG, ...

Of course, the latest casualty in the OS Wars is your
credibility.

Have a nice day : )

/------------------------------------------------------------------
/Aleksander P. Lesniak (ales...@mines.edu) Team OS/2
/Eng. Physics: Colorado School of Mines Team OS/2
/Intern Student: Bell Laboratories Team OS/2
/Only speaking for me. selim sivad sevil


Bill Oconnor

unread,
Jan 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/29/96
to
In article <4ej00j$j...@magma.Mines.EDU>,
ales...@teton.Mines.EDU (Lesniak) wrote:

>DOMINIC KAILATH (Kai...@mci.newscorp.com) wrote:


>: PowerPC now becomes the latest casualty in the IBMs attempt to
>: impose a properietory architecture in the microcomputer industry.
>: The list is getting longer -- microchanel, OS2, PowerPC---

>: Dominic

>You do realize, do you not, that the PPC is architecture has
>been embraced by other companies, that PPC machines run
>a variety of operating systems?

>Dominic, FYI OS/2 is an operating system, not a "proprietary
>architecture". Of course, one could say that DirectX, MAPI,
>Blackbird, Internet Explorer, Win32 are proprietary API's
>that have fallen victim to Microsoft's latest attempt to
>impose a "properietory architecture." Oh, and the list
>is getting longer...MSN, WinG, ...

>Of course, the latest casualty in the OS Wars is your
>credibility.

Alek,

It's kinda funny, I just heard on BBR that Microsoft and MCI
just went into some joint venture having to do with the
Internet.

I now wonder if we will now be seeing Dominic and a bunch of
other MCI hacks FUDding here.

>/Aleksander P. Lesniak (ales...@mines.edu) Team OS/2

--

rj friedman

unread,
Jan 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/30/96
to
In message <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com> - "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> writes:

¯
¯WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially
¯terminated, but Warp for PC will now be focused. Though it is not clear
¯that this "PC" means consumer market or just PC as a generic term.

Don't worry about it - not a word of its termination is true. Like someone
pointed out here a while back: "You can count on the WSJ to come out with an
anti OS/2 article every six weeks like clockwork."

More planted rumors - signs of FUD (Fear Und Desperation) echoing through the
halls of the MS Department of Propoganda.

¯Pete

ÉÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍËÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ»
º[RJ] º º
ºrj friedman º Team ABW º
ºTaipei, Taiwan º r...@tpts1.seed.net.tw º
ÈÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÊÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍͼ


Lesniak

unread,
Jan 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/31/96
to
Bill Oconnor (ocon...@raven.cybercom.com) wrote:
: Alek,

: It's kinda funny, I just heard on BBR that Microsoft and MCI
: just went into some joint venture having to do with the
: Internet.

: I now wonder if we will now be seeing Dominic and a bunch of
: other MCI hacks FUDding here.

<Sigh...>
Some much FUD, so little time. <g>
It's becoming a full time job.

: >/Aleksander P. Lesniak (ales...@mines.edu) Team OS/2

: --

: Bill OConnor

: * When the NEWS is bad! -- SHOOT the messenger! *

/============================================================
|'...They stab you in the back/And they claim that you're
| not looking/But you got them in the region/In the
| valley of decison...Go down back-bite...Go down....'
|Alex Lesniak (ales...@mines.edu) Team OS/2 +BM&W


--
/------------------------------------------------------------------


/Aleksander P. Lesniak (ales...@mines.edu) Team OS/2

c.groark

unread,
Jan 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/31/96
to
In article <4elgnp$n...@voyager.iii.org.tw>,

rj friedman <r...@tpts1.seed.net.tw> wrote:
>More planted rumors - signs of FUD (Fear Und Desperation) echoing through the
>halls of the MS Department of Propoganda.

Actually, RJ, it's Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, not that changes anything
important.

Charlie

Nick Marc

unread,
Feb 1, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/1/96
to
-> From: ales...@teton.Mines.EDU (Lesniak)
-> Subject: Re: IBM Supports OS/2 for PPC (WSJ 1/26/96)
->
-> Bill Oconnor (ocon...@raven.cybercom.com) wrote:
-> : Alek,
->
-> : It's kinda funny, I just heard on BBR that Microsoft and MCI
-> : just went into some joint venture having to do with the
-> : Internet.
->
-> : I now wonder if we will now be seeing Dominic and a bunch of
-> : other MCI hacks FUDding here.
->
-> : Bill OConnor

Well, this venture hasn't help Microsoft's stock even though
MCI is at it's highest peak ever. In fact, investors listened
with a dull thud at this announcement as they did with the
Packard Bell fiasco and the NBC "still waiting" for this one.

Nick Marc...

Richard Steiner

unread,
Feb 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/2/96
to
Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy, ber...@rice.edu (Bernard B. Yoo)
spake unto us, saying:

>The x86 is where most of the market is now and it is the best place
>for IBM to "rip the face off of its competitors" (did Lou Gerstner
>really say that?).

Ouch! :-) Sounds painful. Although it might be amusing, depending
on whose face he was referring to.

--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> rste...@skypoint.com >>>---> Bloomington, MN
Written offline using PC Yarn + Yes + TDE in a Warp VDM
Ever notice how poems in pig-latin always rhyme?

Bill Oconnor

unread,
Feb 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/2/96
to
In article <RxaExoHp...@skypoint.com>,

rste...@skypoint.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
>Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy, ber...@rice.edu (Bernard B. Yoo)
>spake unto us, saying:

>>The x86 is where most of the market is now and it is the best place
>>for IBM to "rip the face off of its competitors" (did Lou Gerstner
>>really say that?).

>Ouch! :-) Sounds painful. Although it might be amusing, depending
>on whose face he was referring to.


Rich, I think Lou probably said something like, "we're going
to unmask" the frauds. I think he is probably too much of a
gentleman to talk about "ripping the face" off of someone.


But then again, I really don't know. Should be an interesting
spectacle in any case.


> -Rich Steiner >>>---> rste...@skypoint.com >>>---> Bloomington, MN

--

Bill OConnor

* When the NEWS is bad! -- Send in the CLOWNS! *

Bernard B. Yoo

unread,
Feb 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/2/96
to
Kim Sommer (kaso...@ansel.intersource.com) wrote:
: soyring@ wrote:

: : In <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> writes:
: : >WSJ's electronic front page said that OS/2 for PPC is officially

: Thanx for the update John,

Ditto here, John. Keep us informed of OS/2 developments and we will
pass the word on as many times as is necessary for the truth to get
out.

: I and probably the rest of the OS/2 supporters who populate this noisy

: place we call c.o.o.a are glad that someone from IBM management is
: showing an agreesiveness in setting the record straight. Too often in
: the past silence has given consent when OS/2 and its future has been
: attacked. You have to be a pretty busy fellow but a note dropped here
: every now and then couldn't hurt. (hint hint)

: FWIW, it seems to me with the PowerPC being an IBM product, getting Warp
: Server moved to PPC *soon* would be a Really Good Thing.

Getting Warp Server moved to PPC soon is definitely not a bad idea, but
with the test results of Warp and Win95 on the Pentium Pro, IBM made a
sound decision to concentrate on x86 development this year. The x86 is


where most of the market is now and it is the best place for IBM to
"rip the face off of its competitors" (did Lou Gerstner really say
that?).


: Kim
: --

: Kim A. Sommer - kaso...@intersource.com
: -or- kas...@dice.nwscc.sea06.navy.mil
: //Team-OS/2, B5, aikido, things that go zoom//

--
***********************************************************************
* Bernard B. Yoo * ber...@owlnet.rice.edu *
* Associate Director, KASCON X * Wiess College *
* http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~ksa/kascon * Rice University *
***********************************************************************

Bill Oconnor

unread,
Feb 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/3/96
to
In article <4ev59u$9...@voyager.iii.org.tw>,
r...@tpts1.seed.net.tw (rj friedman) wrote:
>In message <M7dExAuL...@raven.cybercom.com> -
ocon...@raven.cybercom.com (Bill Oconnor) writes:

>¯Rich, I think Lou probably said something like, "we're going


>¯to unmask" the frauds. I think he is probably too much of a
>¯gentleman to talk about "ripping the face" off of someone.


>¯But then again, I really don't know. Should be an interesting
>¯spectacle in any case.


>If anyone is selling tickets to the main event, put me down for a
>front row seat.


RJ, you better get them tickets early, I hear it will be a
"scalpers" dream event!

>º[RJ] º º

rj friedman

unread,
Feb 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/3/96
to
In message <M7dExAuL...@raven.cybercom.com> - ocon...@raven.cybercom.com
(Bill Oconnor) writes:
¯

¯Rich, I think Lou probably said something like, "we're going
¯to unmask" the frauds. I think he is probably too much of a
¯gentleman to talk about "ripping the face" off of someone.

¯But then again, I really don't know. Should be an interesting
¯spectacle in any case.


If anyone is selling tickets to the main event, put me down for a front row
seat.

¯Bill OConnor

Joseph Coughlan

unread,
Feb 6, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/6/96
to
soyring@ writes:

> In <4e9v45$g...@cet.cet.com>, "P. Pete Chong" <ch...@cet.com> writes:

Read Sorying below and remember that Win95's Nashville release by
MS was canceled. MS isn't doing a Win95 release in 1996 either.
Quite similar.

IBM PPC OS/2 and MS Win95 both will NOT have releases in 1996.
Both IBM and MS have made identical adjustments to their
products by re-emphasizing OS/2 Intel and MS emphasizing NT.

The spin is very different, OS/2 PPC is "dead." Win95 isn't
FUDded at all. It's typical for OS/2.

IMHO after IBM begins to grow OS/2 market share we'll be reading
different spins. I think IBM will have an app price war with MS
Office and OS price war with OS/2 and NT on PPro systems.

I see IBM's windows interet package was $79 and now is $24.
This is why I think IBM will go after MS with agressive pricing
to grow marketshare.

It will take several quarters of good execution on IBM's
part to turn around the media. By late 1996 I think we'll see if
they do execute. IMHO they have the product and experience.
This time they also realize it's an important market to win.


> What we said is that our development focus in 1996 will be on
> enhancing OS/2 Warp as both a client operating system (the
> MERLIN project) and as a server operating system (the OS/2 Warp
> Server projects) on the Intel and Intel-compatible platforms. We
> are not planning additional releases of the OS/2 Warp family on the
> PowerPC platform during 1996 -- as we *just* released in
> late December 1995 the OS/2 Warp (PowerPC Edition) product.

..


> We have just not announced future releases on the PowerPC
> platform.
>
> In no way should our announcement imply that we are backing away
> from the PowerPC.
>

> John

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages