Re: Free OS/400 -- MIDRANGE-L



----- Original Message -----
From: "Carel Teijgeler" <COTeijgeler@chello.nl>
To: <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: Free OS/400


> At 16:49 29-6-01 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >Now, when OS/2 was announced, it wasn't IBM that sold it to me, it was
Bill
> >Gates. He did a lot of PR for it saying it was the OS of the future and
all
> >that. I liked the idea that there were two sources for it, just as there
had
> >been for DOS. To me, the concept of an industry standard desktop
operating
> >system that had more than one vendor seemed like a good thing for
customers.
>
> Chris,
>
> MS may have sold OS/2 in the beginning, but the above picture is not
complete.
>
> In a earliear message you (I think) said OS/2 was a joint venture of IBM
> and MS. Windows 2.0 was just a toy for the PC in those days. The "OS of
the
> future" should look like Windows and MS abandoned the OS/2-project. The
> source code written till that moment was handed over to IBM. IBM had to
> take another year or two to get the code (and thus OS/2) in such a shape
> that it was operational, because MS had made a terrible chaotic piece of
> codejunk of it. (if this was done on purpose: say it out loud, spread the
> word, inform the government)
>
> Windows 3.0 had been released before OS/2 was: "the OS of the future",
> promised for the year 1992 but released in 1995 (and then the whole
> community was fooled, because it was still runnig DOS(MS have admitted
> that)). The rest is history, how dark as it can be.

Well, PC OS history this may be, but: It wasn't so much that MS just
abandoned it. Microsoft changed their focus internally and this caused a lot
of conflict with their partner, IBM. The industry rags reported that IBM was
upset with Microsoft because they missed so many deadlines.

Now, that is just about the only true Microsoft Standard. Deadlines 1.1.

Anyway, the split went like this, Microsoft had rights to the OS/2 code for
1.x and 2.x and IBM had license to Windows code. Microsoft was required to
assist with implementing support for Windows under OS/2. At the release of
OS/2 2.x Windows 2.0 was the only one supported and IBM had to implement
from then on.

There was a time limit on the cross license. I can't remember the date, but
I do recall that it ended the month prior to the release of Windows 3.11 and
Windows for Workgroups which both, coincidentally, introduced file access
incompatible with OS/2.

There was more fun stuff, like the way the Win32s spec changed five times
during '95. It upset the application developers and that is why there
weren't any 32 bit Windows apps available when Windows 95 was released, but
that wasn't the point. It was aimed at IBM who was implementing the Win32
spec under OS/2. I forget which version IBM finally settled on, but they
decided they wouldn't go any further.

Okay, what does this have to do with today's AS/400 market? It's this, all
during this time, OS/2 users kept saying, "If only IBM would market OS/2
better!" blah blah blah. Completely ignoring the whole conflict between IBM
and Microsoft for trying to get shelf space, running applications, etc. for
the desktop operating system.

The same as is happening here today with the AS/400. Microsoft wants the
server market and is after it in many ways. Aside from developing or buying
products to be able to provide services, they are working to tie their
desktops more closely with the server so that the level of service they
provide will be higher to the user desktop if the server is Microsoft.
Through distributed objects which have tighter integration with Windows
desktops and servers, development tools which provide a higher level of
support and such, Microsoft wants to make it implausable to keep using non
Microsoft platforms.

I noticed the other day that Microsoft's new licensing agreement says that
you aren't allowed to work on Linux products with their tools. Open source
products are now "virul software" and Microsoft doesn't want you to work on
it, for all our sakes.

Anyway, more/better marketing is always useful, but that won't win the
marketplace. Neither will being the better product, or everyone would have
AS/400s all over the place.

By winning the front end battle, Microsoft has already won half (or more) of
the server battle. That may be why it seems that IBM could be getting out of
the server market someday. That is why IBM has tried so hard to get the
market to adopt some other form of front end, browser, Java, OS/2, whatever.
As long as it didn't give an advantage to the Microsoft back end, IBM
preferred it.

But that isn't the direction the market is taking. If the market wants all
Windows, that will mean that Bob is absolutely right, the AS/400 will go
away. A piece at a time, really,

>
> Regards,
>
> Carel Teijgeler.


Chris Rehm
javadisciple@earthlink.net
If you believe that the best technology wins the
marketplace, you haven't been paying attention.



+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---