Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!goldenapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!purdue!mozo.cc.purdue.edu!wizard.pn.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!165.254.2.53!nonexistent.com!not-for-mail
From: Timothy Reaves <reaves@unix.asb.com>
Subject: Re: support for OS/2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Nntp-Posting-User: (Unauthenticated)
Reply-To: reaves@unix.asb.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <E77sx0.6x7@nonexistent.com>
References: <857598029.3621.0@ubels.demon.nl> <c0.9w.2FHKQG$09e@craftedsmalltalk.com> <33232357.73BA@pacbell.net> <c0.9w.2FLMHw$09k@craftedsmalltalk.com> <3327AA0D.1193@smalltalksystems.com> <332828E7.31AE@bmi.net> <33298170.26F9@smalltalksystems.com> <E73K9x.Bxs@nonexistent.com> <332B1AAD.2EE0@smalltalksystems.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (OS/2; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: 858647833/8949
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: sls31.asb.com
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 01:16:58 GMT
Lines: 137

Eric Clayberg wrote:
> 
> Timothy Reaves wrote:
> >
> >      Look Eric, some people in this group seem to think your not a loon,
> > but I've got to wonder. I've posted several times what PPD's OFFICIAL
> > position on OS/2 and Mac was, and you just refuse to believe it. If you
> > choose to be delusional, fine, but OS/2 and Mac development have been
> > OFFICIALLY dropped. Period.
> 
> Timothy, do you speak for PPD? How do you know what PPD's official
> position is on the subject? What person in a position of authority at
> PPD told you this? I saw this rumor posted several times and have yet to
> see any evidence that it is true. It's not a matter of being delusional
> at all (and, BTW, I *strongly* resent your personal attack on me). I

     Sorry if you feal this is an attack; grow some stronger skin.



> haven't seen any pronouncement from PPD that this is the case. I have
> asked *several* times where this information came from and haven't seen
> a satisfactory answer. Travis offered up that it was in their web page
> announcement from January. I checked - it wasn't. It certainly wasn't
> true at the point I left PPD last month and it *isn't* true now. I even
> asked several PPD employees at Smalltalk Solutions - including Richard
> Dym, VP of Marketing, and Hal Hildebrand, Chief Scientist - whether it
> was true or not. Both said the rumor was untrue, that PPD *was*
> continuing with Mac and OS/2 development, and asked where such a rumor
> had originated. Do you mind if I pass on your name? Maybe you can
> straighten it out with them.
> 
> > For anyone wanting confirmation of what I've said, e-mail me
> > personally.
> 
> Actually, I'd be much more interested if you posted your source of

     I'll post this information tomorrow. I'm at home now and my contact
information is at work.



> information here. It would seem that your source is inaccurate and was
> offerring you idle speculation at best. Unless you got your information
> directly from someone in authority at PPD (as I did), you are in no
> position to comment on what PPD's "OFFICIAL" position might be. Either
> name your source (and the authority they have to state or make PPD's
> official policy on the matter) or, if you read it in some official PPD
> document, tell us which one. As of last Wednesday (when I asked Richard
> and Hal) at least, PPD's "OFFICIAL" position was that both platforms
> would be further supported and further engineered. Period.
> 
> > Eric, stop beating a dead horse.
> 
> Look, Timothy, I saw this rumor posted several times and have only asked
> folks what the source of the information was. Such a rumor *could* have
> been true, but since I hadn't heard anything about it, I was justifiably
> skeptical and asked for confirmation. None has come from this news group
> (other than Travis' erroneous claim that it was in their earlier
> announcement). I asked several people at PPD, including people with the
> authority to answer, and I was told that it was not true. End of story.
> I'll stop beating your dead horse when you stop spreading false rumors,
> OK?
> 



     For those interested, here's the story.

     Last October the company I work for and one of our clients asked me
to evaluate various SmallTalk versions to replace our Enfin tools.
Shortly thereafter I chose VW 2.51 for OS/2. As we were going to be
doing extensive web development for our client, and VWave 1.0 was
comming along, this made more sense. My company paid PPD much money for
training, both here and by flying people to their Sunnyvale training
center.

     We then signed a $300,000.00 contract with PPD. Not negotiated, not
'promised', but had a signed, legel document in out possession. The
contract stipulated that by October 31, 1996, PPD would DELIVER 19
copies of VWave 1.0 for OS/2, as well as some sever licenses. Now, in
the SmallTalk world, I'm sure this doesn't represent a big investment,
but to my small company it did.

     October 31 came and went. No VWave. We did receive a bill for the
large number of consulting people we were using. We had them in helping
with design at this point, no real development. Upon calling and talking
with my contact at that time, Don DeYoung, we were informed that the
OS/2 version was runnign late. Don had a developer(?) from Maryland I
beleive e-mail me an OS/2 VWorks 2.52 engine, as supposidly this was to
be the only change for the OS/2 version of VWave. It never worked and
the person that e-maild it to me never returned my phone calls.

     PPD SHIPPED 19 coppies of the NT version of VWave(mid-october).
When questioned as to why they did this, Don reponded that the NT VWave
image could be used with the OS/2 VWorks engine. At the CA training
class I attended my parter was from the R&D department of SamSung Korea.
She had told me that for their web development they also were using NT
images with OS/2 engines. So we proceded to use these until the OS/2
shrink-wrap was due out, wich was RSN. No go.

     Talks continued thru January, with he VP of North American sales
brought in to meet with us. He assured us that the OS/2 version was just
a matter of pressing disks, and we'd have it RSN. This was late
November. In December thay asked us to pay up on the expired contract
with us continuing to use the OS/2 engine with the NT image. We refused,
and returned all software, even though our contract said this was not
necessary. They at that time stated that the shrink-wrap was looking
doubtfull, but would support it for us never-the-less ( the NT OS/2
combo). After talking it over, we again refused.

     In early January Don DeYoung and one other person quit. Where as he
told me it was not soley because of the way PPD has treated us, he said
it was a great contributing factor. He gave me the name af the person
that was to handle his accouts for the interim. This new person was out
of the NJ office. I contacted him and he was aware of our situation. He
had been in one of the meetings with me. He said that PPD was starting
their yearly pep rallies and that he would know more after they were
over.

     About the third week of January he finally got back with me. He
informaed me that the company had decided to drop all future development
on the OS/2 and Mac platforms, that Jigsaw and VSE were cancelled, and
that all products would be merged into DWave. I asked him if this was
official. His responese was that he was not aware if PPD had released a
statement, but he had got it directly from someone (I forget who) in CA.
I asked him for confirmation. He conferenced me with the VP of North
American Sales, and he repeated, damn near virbatem, the above.

     We then concluded that we could not afford, nor ethically justify,
doing business with a company that had breached a $300,000.00 contract.
They broke the law. Period. I at that time decided to switch to VA with
Versant, and have not regretted the decission. In retrospect, I wish it
had been the original decission. Oh well.

     As I said, I'll post the name and phone number tomorrow, but for
anyone  that wants, simply call their NJ offices.
