Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 19th Jul 2005 03:36 UTC, submitted by her friend Brad
OS/2 and eComStation In the dawn of the end of IBM's OS/2 Stardock's CEO Brad Wardell pays his respects to the venerable operating system by writing a long article about the history of the OS. Stardock was one of the major third party software houses for OS/2 back in the day and so Brad has lived OS/2 from up close.
Permalink for comment 6188
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
rcsteiner
Member since:
2005-07-12

The BEST hardware you could buy in the PC world when windows 3.1 came out was a 386/33...and most people only had 4 megs of RAM in them. 8 megs was 'wow', 16 was 'what the hell are you gonna use that for?'

Windows 3.1 was released in the spring of 1992 just before OS/2 2.0.

I bought my first 486DX/33 with 8MB in August 1992, and at that point 486DX/50 machines were also available. At that time, 8MB machines were a relatively standard (and common) configuration, and 16MB machines were used by a lot of hobbyists.

OS/2 2.x on 16 megs ran like like... well, it ran like Windows 95 on 4 megs of RAM...

Actually, once the SWAPPATH trick was used, OS/2 2.0's speed was okay even on an 8MB box (load times could be slow, but things were fine once software was loaded).

OS/2 Warp 3 was a little bit faster than 2.0 or 2.1 on low RAM boxes, but it wasn't released until 1994.

That they tied it so closely to their hardware blunder didn't help.

IBM's versions of OS/2 2.0 and later *never* had a tie with their PS/2 hardware line (or any IBM hardware), and I'm not sure that any of the 1.x versions (most of them released as "Microsoft OS/2") did either.

The perception was certainly there, but I don't think it had any basis in fact.

Reply Parent Score: 2