:>>> Lotus and Microsoft Corp. have agreed to include Microsoft's Internet Explorer
:>>> 4.0 with Lotus products and to deliver "extremely tight integration" between
:>How is it totally unrelated? Lotus is giving very mixed signals here.
:>On one hand they say "Ra Ra Java" and in the next breath their signing
:>a pact with the company that they claim is trying to kill Java.
Gee Erik. How does this show that Lotus is abandoning Java? I guess
you didn't read the article. They said that Netscape Comm. would be
intergrated in the not to distant future. You'r not trying to plant
seeds of doubt are you?
:>>I suppose the tight partnership between IBM and MS was the reason 1-2-3
:>>for win32 took until 1997 to ship. Or does that equally relevant fact
:>>have no relevance since it's not a bash against OS/2?
:>Uhh.. IIRC 123 for Win32 shipped in late 1995 in SmartSuite 96 for
Erik, Erik, Erik......... When Smartsuite for Win95 first shipped,
1-2-3 and another app (* graphics as I recall) were not made
for Win32 but were instead the old Win3.1 versions (when Smartsuite for
OS/2 came, these two pieces of software were also Win3.1 versions as
well for your info). It took sometime to get the Win32 versions out.
The poster (Joseph?) who brought this up was indeed correct. I'm
pretty sure that 1-2-3 in Win32 form never showed up in 95 and indeed
didn't come out until '97.
:>>Of course Jim fails to mention that in the past few weeks Lotus has just
:>>reveresed their development policy and is now going to rewrite their
:>>entire Win32 specific suite (a new and costly investment in windows)
:>>into a Java application for the sake of portablility. He also ignores
:>>the head LOTUS Exec's comments on the large amount of revenue OS/2
:>>generats for LOTUS.
:>Hmm.. Again, Joseph, how can you ignore the evidence in front of your
:>face? What do the words "The two companies plan to ensure strong
:>support of Microsoft's Component Object Model in Lotus applications."
:>mean to you exactly?
Yep, you are trying to plant seeds of doubt.
:>>I think taking two unrelated items and implying a cause-effect is a
:>>cheap shot. It is less relevant than a direct commitment of LOTUS to
:>>OS/2 and the corssware ideals supported in OS/2 and across of al of
:>>IBM/LOTUS's platforms IBM. Lastly, Jim fails to see (or read in balck
:>>and white) how IBM is gaining leverage with Netscape by playing MS and
:>>Netscape off one another to get a better deal for IBM and it's
:>Considering that IBM has been talking about Netscape as their browser
:>of choice this announcement is very interesting. I'm guessing that
Guessing?? YOU!? NO!!!!!! You NEVER do that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'M GUESSING the man in the moon would like to hurl moon rocks at your
:>Communicator's terrible stability must have something to do with it,
:>as well as Netscape's reluctance to debundle the rest of the tools.
Erik, Erik, Erik.......... Anouncements about the current version of
IE regarding stability and security issues have been pouring out of the
press like it's the only thing to write about for some time. Perhaps
you should write to IBM/Lotus and inform them of their mistake?
:>If Lotus is going full hog on IE, then how long before IBM does as
:>well? And if IBM goes all out on IE then they'll probably want to
:>bribe MS to create an OS/2 version.
Hahahahahahaaahahahahaahahaahaaa........ROTFL....... What a hoot you
:>remove the _x at the end of my address to reply
Reply? Why would I want to reply to you (in email)?
"The biggest trick Microsoft pulled
off was convincing the world that
Windows was the only operating