Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 21:11 UTC, submitted by judgen
OS/2 and eComStation "In this anniversary, I'd like to shed some light about my first-hand experience with [OS/2], especially since I see many attempts at history re-writing and over-simplification, when people compress OS/2's two decades into a single paragraph. An OS/2 user named Roger Perkins wrote to OS/2 newsgroups ten years ago: "Here's to OS/2's 10th Anniversary on April 2nd! No OS has ever died so many times!"
Thread beginning with comment 226721
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Money talks
by Laurence on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 22:49 UTC
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

This article reminds me how much Microsoft have bought their way to dominance rather than fighting their way there through producing the 'best' software.

But then I guess that's business for you. ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Money talks
by helio9000 on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 23:30 in reply to "Money talks"
helio9000 Member since:
2006-05-24

First it is comical to read a story where IBM is the poor abused company. Read Big Blue - The Use and Abuse of Power if you want to know how MS learned at the knee of the master. But mostly it reminds me of what mess IBM was:

By then I realized that OS/2 faced an uphill battle, even internally. Big Blue's own PC division was *notorious* for even refusing to install OS/2 - IBM's own OS - at some point, much to the dismay of IBMers at the Boca Raton and later Austin TX software unit.

>>>

Please if your own company won't install your OS you've got bigger problems than just the competition. If you don't have someone visionary enough to give all your divisions a sold direction you are screwed. Regardless of what MS is doing. It happens to big companies - it is happening to MS now.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Money talks
by Laurence on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 23:53 in reply to "RE: Money talks"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Oh by no means was IBM perfect, but at least OS/2 was an operating system - which is more than could be said for Windows 3 & 4.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Money talks
by Woogbear on Tue 3rd Apr 2007 20:21 in reply to "RE: Money talks"
Woogbear Member since:
2006-07-12

Remember, IBM made the holocaust in Nazi Germany possible by providing the technology needed to do it. Without IBM's help, the holocaust would not have been possible.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE: Money talks
by tomcat on Tue 3rd Apr 2007 22:12 in reply to "Money talks"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

This article reminds me how much Microsoft have bought their way to dominance rather than fighting their way there through producing the 'best' software.

First, IBM and Microsoft collaborated on OS/2, and MS retained rights to the joint-developed source code. Second, MS didn't "buy" Windows market share. OEMs fell all over themselves to ship Windows 3x because the world was ready for a graphical OS and OS/2 wasn't ready for prime time. OS/2 was big, bloated, and expensive.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Money talks
by chekmarx on Mon 9th Apr 2007 21:55 in reply to "RE: Money talks"
chekmarx Member since:
2007-04-09

MS didn't "buy" Windows market share. OEMs fell all over themselves to ship Windows 3x because the world was ready for a graphical OS and OS/2 wasn't ready for prime time. OS/2 was big, bloated, and expensive.


Dude, I don't know what you're smoking but if you really believe the above quote all you are doing is proving the author of the article's point - ie that most people don't have a *clue* how things really went down concerning OS/2, and in your case, also how MS came to power.

I'd explain to you how it really was. How MS bullied OEM's into taking DOS *and* Windows 3.x as a bundle using all the dirty tricks so well documented elsewhere, but I have a feeling you really don't want to know the truth. You got one point sort of correct - ie expensive. Yeah, OS/2 was costly; prior to Warp 3.

Oh, also OEM's couldn't care less about GUIs, etc. All they want to do is move boxes and make money.

Try not to take this the wrong way, but you really need to do some research before you go off on a subject you obviously know nothing about. It just makes you look stupid and ignorant.

chekmarx

Reply Parent Score: 1