Thank that "?"

I hope that you don't just have a thank that man button. I realize that the form is only for one person at a time, but maybe you could change it to "Thank that person" and include a drop down list of previous thankees in the coming months. Maybe even move it to its own page?

Lance Parsons

In regards to the "Thank That Man" editorial, we need to all thank Netscape for Netscape Navigator for OS/2. I cannot think of any more influential program for OS/2 Warp in the last year or so than Navigator for OS/2. If it wasn't for Netscape, I probably would still have Windows 95 on a second partition here. I believe we need to thank them big time.

Chris Boyd

I must concur with you and Mr. Lugo about showing kindness and our appreciation to those that support OS/2, either through hardware or software.

However, I recommend that we send three thanks each month, suggested by you if you wish (maybe a special column for this?):

a) One for hardware that is popular with OS/2 users; if they don't know we are interested in their product, they won't even try to *fully* support it; they might even drop support altogether.

Full support means producing drivers that enables all features of the hardware, software utilities native to OS/2, etc.

Some that come to mind: Creative Labs, ATI Technologies...

(As a side note: I believe ATI gives good support, but I'm not sure that their 3D features are fully enabled under OS/2 - but is it because they haven't tried, or because OS/2 (or DIVE) is presently built in such a way to prevent it? I can't tell and I'd like to know)...

b) One for ISVs that publish software, but not specifically aimed at OS/2. They must be told that we like their product, but we would *much* prefer have a native version to OS/2.

I think about Corel, Borland... (the OS/2 version of CorelDraw and Borland C++ are way behind the ones for Win95...)

c) One last (but most important in some respect) to ISVs primarily dedicated to the OS/2 market. They truly show us that we *are* important to them.

Even though our appreciation can be shown through our buying/registering their product, written words convey much more message than money ever will.

Here I send my thanks to Stardock, J. Cramer, Perez Computing, Star Division...

In short, we should begin a campaign of mass thanksgiving to everyone involved with the OS/2 community.

And I will conclude this message by sending my thanks to the people behind OS/2 e-Zine!: You produce a quality magazine folks, one that I'm always personally looking forward to reading each month. Keep up the good work!

Frederic Genest

I want to thank Matrox for good OS/2 support for their Video Adapters.

Lennart Peterson

This is a great idea. Now, is there a list of development people anywhere to be found out on the net somewhere? I'll be happy to thank anyone who has done something (starting with Codesmith) but a "direct line" to Creative Labs, ATI, and 3Com would be great.

Matt Bear

- editor

Survey Results

I love the surveys that you have now. However, the results from the surveys are lacking in one important feature. GRAPHS! I would still like to see the numbers, but please include a graph or chart of the results. Even if it's just a link to a GIF. Thanks.

Lance Parsons

Paid Betas

Needless to say, I strongly favor "paid" beta programs. Stardock has historically gone the route of users pre-ordering the final version and getting the beta. Depending on how you look at it, they paid for the beta and get the final version free or they paid for the final version early and got to beta it.

Despite what those involved in the debate thought, paid betas don't make any real financial difference to the company. When people beta test Entrepreneur, for example, the money from the beta doesn't "fund" development.

What it does do is eliminate the casual players from joining. A beta program is more than bug testing, beta programs are about ideas and hearing what "wishlists" customers will have before the product is generally available.

If you have a open public beta, you'll get "Feedback" and "suggestions" from users who would not normally have bought the product anyway and this can really hinder development. For example, imagine if Entrepreneur had been a free and open beta program. How many "suggestions" for making it into some other type of game than it was meant to be do you think we'd get? Answer: A LOT. Entrepreneur was meant to be a game of corporate warfare and we wanted beta testers who were interested in playing a game like that. In other words, we wanted people who were interested enough in the concept that they'd buy such a game sight unseen. The highest quality of beta tester is found this way.

So ultimately, paid beta programs have less to do with getting easy money than in trying to provide a quality product.

Afterall, the suggestion that comes from someone who's put their money where their mouth is is worth more than someone who doesn't really care.

Brad Wardell

[In your debate] you fail to even mention the third option, and that is paying the beta testers. These people put in their own resources and time, at the risk of having the setup of their machine trashed, and you want them to pay for it!

Kingsley Turner

- editor

I don't like the idea of people having to pay to beta-test a program. Beta tests should be free to join, at the discretion of the developer. Testers who give good feedback should receive some compensation, probably a copy of the release version.

Chris Kennedy

I agree with Dirk Terell's comments about paid beta programs. I personally will not join any beta programs that require the user to pay, especially since there are so many products that never even make it to a final release. For private beta programs that necessitate feedback from the testers, there should be a discount provided for the final version, to "thank" them for their efforts.

Steve Wendt

SPG and "Legal Obligations"

Chris's Rant goes a long way toward explaining, in a balanced way, the SPG situation and how and why they left the OS/2 market. However, the comment "SPG did not have any legal obligations" may not be correct.

For example, a Ford car owner who is promised a new engine if he buys the 1997 Ford model, and then is suddenly told that Ford has decided to only build Chevy engines, has been cheated. Ford could offer a *FREE* "upgrade" to the latest Chevy engine, and this would still be fraudulent, a failure to deliver on a contract. Court cases on this matter have even ruled that substituting a different engine from the *same company* is still fraud.

If this is true for changing cars -- telling the consumer to go buy a Chevy in order to get the upgrade -- then how much more would it be true for changing operating systems, a much more gut-wrenching sacrifice than simply switching cars? Maybe SPG is in hotter water than you think.

Tom Nadeau

Response to Article about Cybercom

The president of Cybercom has guts for sticking with a superior operating system. It is good to see a valid person providing a REAL product instead of hyping up garbage software.

Joseph Kulakowski

-

Copyright © 1997 - Falcon Networking