Re: XyWrite and OS/2

[Harmon F Seaver hseaver@xxxxxxxx]

Carl says:
>
>True enough. But, in addition to absolute numbers, shouldn't you also
>consider which OS user base is more likely to adopt a product like
>XyWrite? Say the installed base for Windows is 30 million. If you
>attract .001 of that base, you've only sold 30,000 copies. Whereas if
>you're able to attract .02 of an OS/2 installed base of 5 million,
>you've sold 100,000 copies -- more if the OS/2 user base is growing, as
>IBM says it is, and the word-of-mouth about Xy is good (which we
>presume it would be).

  Well said, Carl. There is another definite point about the
numbers in that MS claims ridiculous numbers of users based upon
all those machines sold which included windoz -- however, a great
many of those included software packages were simply tossed. I
know for a fact I've tossed at least
6 copies of windoz myself over the years, on my machines and my
kids and people I've worked for. And I've been told of large
quantities being tossed by corporate entities after large
purchases. On the other hand, OS/2 is almost always bought to
use.

>
>There's a strong argument that a WP like Xy -- which puts its best foot
>forward when it's been customized by a reasonably competent user -- is
>more likely to appeal to the get-under-the-hood-and-tinker sort that
>seems to adopt OS/2, than it is to the stereotypically
"know-nothing"
>Windows point-and-clicker. I realize that this is not the sole
>consideration, but are you giving it any weight at all?
>
  My sentiments exactly. That's why I feel TTG has lost touch
with the inate character of XY users. I think the original
creators of XY were hackers, and the hacker mentality of that era
was superseded by the business mentality of TTG.
  Anyone who bothered to learn XY 2 or 3 is by definition a
"power user".
It was by all accounts the hardest word processor to learn to use
ever created. Only power users bothered -- the rest went to Word
Star, or the others. What some people forget is that word
processing is only one aspect of computer use -- how many XY
users who want technical superiority in their word processing are
going to tolerate technical inferiority in their system as a
whole? Frankly, I don't think it's possible to build a
technically superior word processor based on cripple-ware like
windoz. Whether it is on win95 remains to be seen, but if it only
runs on win95, then TTG cuts itself off from the whole PowerPC
market.
  But the bottom line in the business sense is still a mystery to me. If
OS/2 is such a loser, how do all those small developer like the writers of
FM/2, TE/2, Mesa/2 (the only spreadsheet I've ever actually liked) stay in business?

-- Harmon Seaver hseaver@xxxxxxxx hseaver@xxxxxxxx
seaverh@xxxxxxxx harmon@xxxxxxxx

The fundamental delusion of humanity is that I am in here and you
are out there.