home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!sunic!aun.uninett.no!nuug!ifi.uio.no!nntp.uio.no!olavt
- From: olavt@ulrik.uio.no (Olav Torvund)
- Subject: Re: OS/2 2.1? (Why it may cost) READ THIS!!
- In-Reply-To: harvey@waikato.ac.nz's message of 14 Dec 92 09:48:03 +1300
- Message-ID: <OLAVT.92Dec14003146@ulrik.uio.no>
- Sender: news@ulrik.uio.no (Mr News)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: ulrik
- Organization: University of Oslo, Norway
- References: <62740@mimsy.umd.edu> <1992Dec14.094803.12759@waikato.ac.nz>
- Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 23:31:46 GMT
- Lines: 26
-
- In article <1992Dec14.094803.12759@waikato.ac.nz> harvey@waikato.ac.nz writes:
-
- > Sorry if someone has posted this information already but I was
- >speaking to our local IBM person on friday (11/12/92). She said that
- >the reason that OS/2 2.1 has been delayed is because there is a fight
- >going on between IBM and microsoft. Basically microsoft is trying to
- >force IBM to charge for the next update because they recon that in
- >moving to 3.1 code they can charge more.
-
- > This stinks but IBM are trying to get it out for a media charge only.
-
- > Mark Harvey
-
- Win 3.1 support is of course important in todays market. But I think
- that if MS continues this attitude, IBM should in not to distant
- future make Windows support an option. Past 1993 I will probably not
- need Windows support anymore, so why pay MS for it? Making Win support
- an option from let us say OS/2 2.2 or 3.0 can also boost the
- development of OS/2 applications, assuming that OS/2 will have a well
- established critical user base by then.
-
- Olav Torvund
- University of Oslo
- Norway
- Olavt@jus.uio.no
-
-