MB>Your documentation -- indeed, the outside of your box -- claims that your
MB>compiler makes 16-bit OS/2 1.x executables.  How is that possible without th
MB>required header files?  I suppose, in theory, that one could manually define
MB>each and every function prototype in the OS/2 1.x API.  I suppose, in theory
MB>that one could also make bricks without straw.  Neither is a recommended
MB>procedure.

I expect that most of people who buy Watcom to build OS/2 1.x
executables already have copies of these headers anyway.  I mean...
who's going to be embarking on a new career in creating 16-bit software
these days?  Having said that, I acknowledge your point regarding the
lack of headers in the package.  IBM seem a bit reluctant to admit that
the 16 bit world still exists (witness the total lack of documentation
realating to VIO calls in the CSet++ package!) and if *they* won't
license the headers to you what are you supposed to do?  The argument
might also be put that since the package doesn't include "How to program
for MicroSoft Windows" tutorials then you can't write Windows progs
either :-)

MB>This is another case like the first.  The IDE offers a selection for a PDD i
MB>the 32-bit compiler section when choosing a target.  But a PDD is never 32-b
MB>and there is no PDD choice in the 16-bit compiler section.  Again, the IDE
MB>makes an offer to do something which, in fact, it is impossible for your
MB>compiler to do.

Hey, this is release *.0!  Have you read about all the flack that
Borland are copping for BC/C++ 4.0 (and 4.02)?  All software has bugs
and it's a fact of life that in 170MB worth of "release zero" software
you're going to have to expect that not everything works as documented.
If you can do better than Watcom, Borland, IBM, Microsoft, et al then
please go ahead... we'll all thank you for it.

MB>I purchased your product on CD-ROM, a product which claims to be a professio
MB>compiler.  Watcom has, in the past, enjoyed a superb reputation.  I have bee
MB>shocked to discover that, unlike the Watcom of the past, I am dealing with a
MB>compiler which:

MB>1.  Claims to be able to do things which it cannot, in fact, do;

The two claims you've highlighted won't affect more than a very small
percentage of users ... and if you don't like it there's a 60 day
money-back guarantee.  NOBODY can please all the people all the time.
Hell, when Microsoft released MSC/C++ 7 half the bloody manuals were
missing and you had to fill out a card and mail it off to have them put
on back-order for delivery in six week's time!

MB>2.  Does not include run-time library source, although the CD-ROM
based MB>installation program claims to have installed it from the same
CD-ROM;

Runtime source is not usually supplied as part of a compiler product.
The only exception to this is Borland ... but then again, they hardly
have anything to hide now do they :-)  Neither Microsoft nor IBM ship
their runtime library source-code on the CD versions of their product.
At least Watcom will sell you the code if you really want it.

MB>3.  Does not include free technical support.

BZZZT!!! Wrong!
If you read page 5 of the "Getting Started" manual you will see that
you're entitled to 60 days *free* support.  Watcom has been highly
praised for the level and quality of it support in the past.  No doubt
it was much easier for Watcom to provide this level of support because
its users were (almost without exception) professional programmers who
chose to forego glitzy IDEs for good solid tools and who already knew
how to program.  With version 10 providing the sizzle as well as the
steak they are obviously going to start attracting more of those users
who require "hand-holding" and might have previously opted for Borland
or Visual C/C++.

I don't know about your part of the world but down here both Borland and
MS charge like wounded bulls for support so Watcom is just falling into
line.  As a full-time programmer who's livelyhood depends on good tools
with good support, I don't much care if they charge so long as the level
of service is maintained.  The last thing I'd like to see is Watcom's
support become inaccessible because the lines were clogged with novices
who can't be bothered reading the manuals or who need help using
scanf().

For all the weaknesses you describe (yes all two of them), this is still
a damned fine product at a give-away price!

Disclaimer: I don't have any association with Watcom apart from being a
satisfied client who cuts DOS, OS/2, Win3.1, WinNT and QNX for a living
using Watcom's tools.

--- Enigmax v1.04a