Looking forward to your series.
Platform independence and universality is the whole concept which underlies SGML (of which HTML is a Web specific subset). But any "universal" standard is notoriously slow to emerge and hard to come by. By the time all interested parties are consulted and agreed, the standard is often out of date or behind the technology. Private companies are much faster and better innovators than standards committees. So, while Netscape muddies the waters by disregarding established HTML principles, they are also expanding the possibilities and advancing the technology in exciting ways. Let's face it, the so-called Netscape enhancements are pretty cool, and they show us what is possible. Try doing that by committee.
One of the big problems with the Netscpape enhancements that Chris doesn't mention in his rant, is that they make it really easy to waste bandwidth. The bandwidth issue is something all net users have to deal with, of course; but I ask the question "Just because we can cram real time video in 24-bit color down a 28.8K connection, does that mean we should?" Netscape has helped us make the Web pretty, but is that what we really need?
Like Chris, I used to get upset about the thousands of sites that told me I needed Netscape to view them. Now I take comfort in the fact that my browser will eventually catch up with Netscape. We are all waiting for a Web Explorer that supports Java, frames, and all of the other doodads that we can get with the Windows specific Netscape. I can't help but speculate that we would not all be upset at Netscape if only they published a browser that ran under OS/2.
My friend is an OS/2 user who speaks both Japanese and English. OS/2 is the ONLY OS that has the interchangeability between languages that he (American) and his wife (Japanese) need. During this gathering, we were actually harassed for our choice of operating systems. It surprised me. I remember no such virulent reaction brought forth against Amiga users by the Microsoft majority of a given social group. What are these people scared of? It must be the functionality of OS/2 when compared to Windows '95.
I was quick-witted enough to change the subject to something less controversial, like politics. The backlash to those three little letters that mean real computing will stick with me for a while to come. Thank you for showing me that IBM is still pushing those three little letters: OS/2.
It may be true, as he says, that "OS/2 Warp comes with a 400 page manual," but I can assure him that the 400 page manual in MY Red Warp package was useful only for getting the program installed and running in a rudimentary fashion. Over half the manual is devoted to listing unsupported hardware devices, analyzing likely configuration problems or proposing different hard drive setups.
I was specifically appalled at the complete lack of discussion of multitasking both in documentation and online. I searched many times for a variety of topics, trying to make the switch from DOS to OS/2, and was sorely disappointed at the lack of usable information. And let's not even mention the TERRIBLE online documentation for either IBM Works or the Internet Access Kit. As a result, I found it necessary to build a large library of printed OS/2 Warp documentation in order to properly run and extract the maximum benefit from the power of the operating system.
The people at DeScribe have put this feature on its list for future development, but seem to be reluctant to do any serious development of new features for the product right now. Too bad, both for DeScribe and for the market for OS/2, which needs competing (and competitive) applications.
I would suggest, however, that in addition to the flaws you mentioned, there is also DeScribe's inability to handle colored text. I realize that you can define a page of text as an image frame and then give the entire page/frame one color. This hardly meets the level of today's word processor. For me, this is a serious enough flaw that I am looking for another OS/2 word processor.
This feature remains, as far as I can tell, unavailable to users of OS/2 (unless we just run our old Dos/Win software ... but that's not the point). It's a bit frustrating because after reading numerous 'reviews' of OS/2 word processors, it is clear that software reviewers rely strictly on 'off-the-cuff' journalism, never needing to reference to past literature. Thus, this serious hole in OS/2 word processing functionality is never addressed.
Other than the sidebars, it probably took 10 minutes using the search and destroy functions of some word processor to create it from its predecessor.
It contains a wealth of information, all of which is common to Warp AND 2.1, but stuff like the IAK coverage just repeats what's already in the help files or on the screen. No need to spend so much money for just that stuff.
I got so excited, it encouraged me to look into ISDN again with some other friends and my local provider. I even created my own 'Count Down to ISDN!' Web page:
I am in a similar position at the moment, and it seems that there isn't a single supplier out there (other than IBM - who can't fill orders, and Indelible Blue - who are pretty expensive) who will even say whether OS/2 runs on their computers, nevermind preinstall Warp.
I would be very interested in an article listing computer suppliers (pref. in the USA - but would be interesting for figures worldwide) that at least acknowledge the existince of OS/2, and preferably certify their computers.
My efforts to find a replacement for my OS/2 computer which has just died, are being frustrated by everyone insisting that Windows95 is the only thing their computers are designed to run.
Is this really just market forces at work, are are Microsoft forcing the hand of suppliers; perhaps by not providing assistance to suppliers that also sell OS/2 Warp pre-insatlled?
Like Alan, I waited and waited. I called the automated status line often, and the estimated delivery date kept slipping. Finally out of the blue my system arrived at my door. Well, Alan, I regret to say I wish it had never arrived.
My first big surprise was when I first booted the machine, it did not boot into Warp, but DOS/WINDOWS! All of the intro stuff like why I bought this machine, its features, and all that hype stuff, was Windows based! Then of course there was a dual boot icon if I really wanted to go to Warp.
Most of the software was not preloaded at all, but simply dumped on the hard drive. Almost everything needed to go through some sort of install process before it was functional, and believe me that was not a simple process! The IBM Help line, the main reason we buy IBM, right? was next to useless. The first few times I called I was told that there would be a 2 to 4 hour wait... well that's not good enough, IBM! Subsequent calls did not even estimate the wait time, but after 30 minutes I hung up.
When I finally got in touch with a real live person, he was no help. Obviously he was either a new hire or a contractor, and every time I asked a question I had to explain the question before he could even search his database. No help at all.
Bottom line: The Internet connection didn't work (I have it working on my Compaq just fine!). Subsequently I have learned that the problem is with the MWAVE modem and drivers that aren't out yet. Anyway to make a long sad story short, I decided that discount or no discount, it was not worth the money to me and I sent it back.
I am still using Warp on my faithful Compaq 486, with its standard IDE controller which limits me disk-wise, but hey, it works! I really wanted that Aptiva, but I was sorely disappointed not only with the package, but with IBM's support commitment to it!
I am working for an Insurance company here in Raleigh - one of the few remaining true Blue shops! Our mainframe is IBM, almost every PC in the place is IBM, and they are all running OS/2, with OS/2 LAN Server installed and (of course) Token Ring cabling. I am accustomed to a PC 750 at work, so I know IBM still makes good computers. But in my opinion the Aptiva is not one of them.
But the big story is that on the back of my digital decoding box are a standard serial and parralell port conecters which DSS and RCA are being very hush hush about! All they will say at their website, is that those connecters are their for "future interactive programing". I personally belive that this may very well be a hookup via satellite to a realtime internet connection that will make that whole ISDN thing obsolete!
Oh well, I thought I'd just start a damn good rumor. Perhaps you guys would like to take the bait and run with it. It might make a fine artical in your next issue if it does pan out!
Get out your favourite mailer or use this link to send us your thoughts!
Copyright © 1995 - Falcon Networking