Image Map Image Map
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 74

Thread: Os/2

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Hampshire, England
    Posts
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck(G) View Post
    It's a wonder that IBM didn't sue them.
    I think that it was partially shock. Us IBMers at the time thought that we were among friends. One of the IBMers in that meeting was one of the nicest guys in IBM, if not the industry. He simply could not believe that he could leave a meeting thinking that he had an agreement only for it to be scuppered three weeks later.

    I do not believe that they would not have got away with it with earlier generations of IBM execs, like "Vinnie" for example.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    4,442
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    MS's internal memos that were released make it fairly clear that MS management saw IBM's plans for OS/2 as being disastrous for MS. MS did anticipate the loss of trust with developers once the split was announced and hoped the profits from Win16 software would assuage the developers. Considering how IBM dawdled on the release of 32-bit OS/2 and then diverted billions to focus on WPOS (with little ever offered for sale) even when faced with MS's competition, I doubt IBM would have been speedier in an universe were MS partnered with IBM longer. The split between IBM and MS was inevitable: MS needed new software to sell but IBM could rely on mainframe revenue to perfect an optimum unified infrastructure. Either MS split from IBM or MS became a Mac only software firm before getting swallowed by Adobe.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    32,550
    Blog Entries
    18

    Default

    It wasn't that MS went their own way--it was the way it was carried out. For example, in 1990:

    Quote Originally Posted by BillG
    OS/2 is our top priority
    Now, if you were an OS/2 developer (and by that time, it was being billed as "Microsoft OS/2") how would you feel about "Forget what we've been saying. You really want to develop for our brand-new-stable-as-warm-Jell-O operating system". I was furious and I suspect that others were also.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Seattle, WA / Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck(G) View Post
    It wasn't that MS went their own way--it was the way it was carried out. For example, in 1990:



    Now, if you were an OS/2 developer (and by that time, it was being billed as "Microsoft OS/2") how would you feel about "Forget what we've been saying. You really want to develop for our brand-new-stable-as-warm-Jell-O operating system". I was furious and I suspect that others were also.
    The OS/2 community should have been kept "in the loop" much better ***by both sides***. It didn't really make sense for MS to hawk IBM's goods at any rate, but both companies should have been more up front.

    I was a direct report to one of the managers on the NT 3.1 group, who had come directly out of OS/2 development, and he even seemed, at first, to have that "deer in the headlights" look...

    Business wise, IBM was known for their disdain of anything that ran on metal weighing <= 2tons (look how they f'd up their PC biz), and MS knew it! They just didn't handle the dev "handover/support" very well...

    gwk

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    32,550
    Blog Entries
    18

    Default

    You could see that IBM figured that they made a mistake. After Warp's lackluster launch (it really was a very nice system), they mailed out CDs free with Warp and the devkit, including the C computer, which was a big deal. I don't know that "The IBM Developer Connection" ever gained a lot of traction.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,072
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Charrisa if you haven't found it already you may like to look at Al Savages page on installing v4 Warp http://asavage.dyndns.org/os2/warp4i...p4install.html

    Just be aware though, as mentioned, that it may not be walk in the park of far as setting it up. Sometimes its far to easy to waste a lot of time getting things functional. On my old v4 install ended up backing out out FP15 settling on FP14. Having a play in a VM might be the better option.
    Last edited by Caluser2000; July 23rd, 2015 at 12:42 PM.
    Thomas Byers (DRI)- "You'll have a million people using the A> [MS-DOS prompt] forever. You'll have five million using [nongraphic] menu systems such as Topview, Concurrent PC-DOS, Desq, and those types. But there'll be 50 to 100 million using the iconic-based interfaces."

  7. #17

    Default

    Wow this has been really cool and informative.
    I already have the last OS/2 available on a CD and 3 floppies. My issue is it doesn't work with any hardware I have at the moment.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,072
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Sounds cheesy but the OS/2 Blond Guy has some good info as well http://www.blondeguy.com/InstallWarp4Essay.html
    Thomas Byers (DRI)- "You'll have a million people using the A> [MS-DOS prompt] forever. You'll have five million using [nongraphic] menu systems such as Topview, Concurrent PC-DOS, Desq, and those types. But there'll be 50 to 100 million using the iconic-based interfaces."

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    32,550
    Blog Entries
    18

    Default

    To get OS/2 Warp 4 running on a P3 system that I had, it took a bunch of downloads to get it running--and all of those were off of floppy. I don't think I'd want to do it again.

    On the other hand, the eComStation variety of OS/2 and seems to be alive and well, at least according to OS/2 World. So go figure...

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,072
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    It is http://www.ecomstation.com/. Last time I looked at OS/2 World it looked like it was a on the decline. Damned if I can remember my old login.
    Thomas Byers (DRI)- "You'll have a million people using the A> [MS-DOS prompt] forever. You'll have five million using [nongraphic] menu systems such as Topview, Concurrent PC-DOS, Desq, and those types. But there'll be 50 to 100 million using the iconic-based interfaces."

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •