Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th May 2008 03:15 UTC
Windows I personally doubted that Windows 7 would make an actual appearance during the Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer joint interview up on stage at the D6 conference, but as it turns out, it has made an appearance. During an interview conducted by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher about Ballmer and Gates' past, present, and future, a short demo was given of Windows 7.
Thread beginning with comment 315951
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Finally
by sukru on Wed 28th May 2008 15:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Finally"
sukru
Member since:
2006-11-19

NT was actually supposed to be OS2/NT, yet IBM failed to provide enough support on the project, and MS decided to go on their own.

Source for this outrageous claim?


Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT#Development

When development started in November 1989, Windows NT was to be known as OS/2 3.0, the third version of the operating system developed jointly by Microsoft and IBM. ... This decision caused tension between Microsoft and IBM and the collaboration ultimately fell apart. IBM continued OS/2 development alone while Microsoft continued work on the newly renamed Windows NT. ...

(Sorry to further continue on this thread. I think both sides have always have something to say).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Finally
by bousozoku on Wed 28th May 2008 15:41 in reply to "RE[4]: Finally"
bousozoku Member since:
2006-01-23


Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT#Development

When development started in November 1989, Windows NT was to be known as OS/2 3.0, the third version of the operating system developed jointly by Microsoft and IBM. ... This decision caused tension between Microsoft and IBM and the collaboration ultimately fell apart. IBM continued OS/2 development alone while Microsoft continued work on the newly renamed Windows NT. ...

(Sorry to further continue on this thread. I think both sides have always have something to say).


Odd that they couldn't even finish Presentation Manager for OS/2 version 1.1 in early 1990, but they had already started on OS/2 version 3.0.

Is everything in a Wiki precisely true?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Finally
by phoenix on Wed 28th May 2008 17:27 in reply to "RE[5]: Finally"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Is everything in a Wiki precisely true?


Maybe not everything, but this bit is. There are several book from this time period that cover the early development of NT. NT originally supported multiple "modes" or "skins" (forget the official term). The default was to be the OS/2 one, but mid-way through development, when Windwos 3.1 took off, MS split from IBM and development the Windows "face".

When NT 3 shipped, it could run OS/2 programs, Windows 3.1 programs, Windows NT programs, and POSIX programs. It also ran on PPC, MIPS, Alpha, x86, and I think a few more.

It wasn't until Windows 2000 that OS/2 support was dropped from NT.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Finally
by Phobos on Wed 28th May 2008 18:20 in reply to "RE[5]: Finally"
Phobos Member since:
2008-04-30

that bit is correct, but the previous claim that "IBM lack of support" was the reason for the split is not true.

the wikipedia article shows the reason of the split from MS' angle, but in reality, MS just saw that they would have much higher profit if they went on by themselves... and also is the cause of their office monopoly, after having sent all the competing companies to develop for OS/2, windows market was alone for themselves....

about all the other comments on MS copying, I would recommend to take a look at RoughlyDrafted.com... some interesting articles are:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/09/10/office-wars-3-how-microsof...
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/09/19/office-wars-4-microsofts-a...
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/08/18/sco-linux-and-microsoft-in...

and many more, look for yourselves

Reply Parent Score: 1