To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
From what I read years ago, the IBM-Microsoft partnership was doomed from the start: How much IBM paid Microsoft depended upon how many lines of code the Microsoft developers wrote - and write they did. Examine how many more steps it is to add a new printer in MS OS/2 1.2 compared with IBM OS/2 1.3.
Also, from what I read, the IBM-Microsoft partnership failed because Microsoft billed for more lines than they actually wrote for OS/2 - IBM was upset that Microsoft was billing IBM for code which Microsoft was actually writing for Windows 3.x and not OS/2.
I am pretty sure I read this in a PC Plus Magazine, sometime around 1991.
Oh well, all ancient history now... I sometimes amuse myself thinking that there may be some lone IBMer somewhere in a dark basement corner slowly shifting through the OS/2 source code, separating the IBM written code from everything else... clearing file by file through their legal department.
One can dream but I think I have better odds winning the jackpot on the lottery.




Member since:
2005-11-17
OS/2 is a lot like RT/11, VMS, or the other dead DEC operating systems. It runs doing its own little thing in a corner for years until the hardware physically breaks.
I had a 486/66 running OS/2 Warp as my company's voicemail system for over 6 years. When the motherboard gave up the ghost, I plugged the two ISA cards that powered it, and the hard drive into an IBM PC300 with a Pentium 166 and 112MB RAM. It came right on and booted up like nothing happened. As far as I know, it's still up and running today (we never turned it off) as it was in 1998.
IBM really knows how to write stable OSes (at least compared to the competition). That's a part of the lesson that Bill Gates should have learned from them.