From: Lee Laniear (laniear_at_attglobal.net)
Date: Tue Dec 24 2002 - 12:06:16 EST
Here are the actual facts:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,763064,00.asp
IBM refuted reports that it was phasing out its OS/2
operating system, saying the company is merely changing the
manner in which it distributes its software.
A notice on IBM's Program Withdrawal section lists dozens of
OS/2 program packages that IBM is withdrawing. The list
includes dozens of packages of OS/2 Warp and upgrades in
various languages.
However, an IBM spokesman said OS/2 is alive and well.
"Really, not very much has changed," the spokesman said. "We
are continuing to support OS/2, just as we always have."
Instead, IBM is phasing out some of its shrink-wrapped
packages. For example, in certain cases IBM sold a physical
package of documentation. Now, customers may be asked to
download the documentation and print it out on the
customer's own printer, the IBM spokesman said.
OS/2 will still be available through IBM's licenseing
program, and the IBM spokesman said the company plans to
support the OS/2 OS "indefinitely".
Lee
>
>Ran across this and thought the list would be interested. Not intended to
>start another OS round of discussions....please.
>
>Obituary: OS/2
>December 16, 2002
>By John C. Dvorak <http://www.pcmag.com/author_bio/0,3055,a=123,00.asp>
>Born April, 1987. Died Dec. 10, 2002. Cause of death: neglect. Place of
>death: Armonk, New York. Next of kin: none. Attending funeral: nobody.
>Official announcement appeared on IBM Website
><http://www.ibmlink.ibm.com/usalets&parms=H_902-274> .
>I suppose this poor fellow has been dead for a long time, but perhaps nobody
>remembered to pick up the corpse (yes, I said the same about CP/M 10 years
>ago). While CP/M died from the ravages of progress, OS/2 died from neglect
>and lack of will. And yes, backing away from OS/2 was a pragmatic move,
>since IBM could not compete with Microsoft or its tactics. But how amazing
>to see a company that large cowed into submission by a bunch of
>whippersnappers in Washington who already had taken IBM to the cleaners when
>they convinced the Goliath to let them own PC-DOS at the outset. The death
>of OS/2 must be humiliating for IBM.
>The history of OS/2 is a ragged mess. Although begun as a joint
>Microsoft-IBM project to create the next generation of operating systems, it
>was apparent early on that the partnership was not going to work. Microsoft
>had too many coders who hated to work with IBM, and IBM was too slow-moving
>for the rest of the caffeine-jacked Microsoft folks.
>I was an OS/2 fan, and even did a book on the OS for Random House. The OS
>was generally faster and less prone to crashing than any of the early
>versions of Windows. But IBM didn't know how to prime the pump and get
>people to develop for OS/2. The company stupidly reckoned that if you give
>developers a good operating system, coders will code for it. Microsoft saw
>this issue differently, and would do anything to get people to code apps for
>Windows. Many of the early Windows programs ran on OS/2 through a piece of
>shared code that let Windows code work. But we all knew that wouldn't last.
>Microsoft was forever changing the Windows API, and had done so since the
>first release of the product. The API has only recently stabilized, and we
>still don't know how long that will last.
>OS/2 wasn't perfect, and my last days with the product came when I did a
>reboot or a shutdown and OS/2 went into limbo. If you ran into this
>situation, you had to completely reinstall the OS, and it happened one time
>too many for me. That was that. IBM was already making noises about giving
>up on OS/2, and Windows 96 was just around the corner.
>Over the years, I noticed that many of the cooler features of OS/2 became
>incorporated into Windows. For all practical purposes, if you are using
>Windows 2000, you are probably running what would have been OS/2. The only
>exception is that all the money goes to Microsoft. And before you object to
>that, you should note that the original OS/2 was called Microsoft OS/2
>(there were even little pins around with that moniker).
>Some years ago, I wrote a column called "Free the Code," where I made the
>point that abandoned software should become public domain, and that code
>should be shared by the public. I noticed recently that this is becoming an
>issue on many discussion forums since a lot of abandonware seems prevalent
>in the post-dot-com bust. In the column I suggested that IBM free the OS/2
>code if it really wanted to get Microsoft. Instead of screwing around with
>Linux, we all could have been playing with the source code for OS/2. What a
>great idea. OS/2 could have just been freeware.
>Anyway, someone pointed out to me that there was no way that IBM would ever
>do such a thing, since much of the code was likely under license or, worse,
>much of it owned by Microsoft anyway! I agree with this assessment. OS/2, of
>course, will continue to find its place in the kernel of various stagnant or
>proprietary systems where it will evolve into something far removed from
>what could have been. It goes the way of the other genuine operating systems
>that couldn't get a foothold, like the Amiga OS and GEM on the Atari and the
>PC. This fate for OS/2 is a shame.
>As to how and why the OS failed to become a huge success-I'm leaving the
>debate open this week. Steve Ballmer comes to mind. He started the ball
>rolling by proclaiming OS/2 to be the next great operating system, and
>within a few years he was walking around the floor of a computer show
>putting disks into computers running OS/2 to crash the systems and prove
>that OS/2 wasn't crash-proof!
>The whole history of OS/2 is quite odd indeed. Before you proceed, a quick
>look at former IBMer David Both's personal history of the product
><http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2History.html>
><http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2History.html
><http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2History.html> > might give you some ideas.
>
>
>________________________
>Robert Rosen
>Chief Information Officer
>National Institute of Arthritis and
> Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases
>National Institutes of Health
>Tel: 301-496-0799
>E-Mail: rosenr_at_mail.nih.gov
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:59:45 EST