Os/2

[eobard]

OS/2 WARP was a nice OS, a lot better than the original 95 even though microsoft had an extra 15 months to tweak 95 to make it better than OS/2 when it was released. Its amazing how the mighty IBM can take a vastly superior product and drive it into the ground.

[engjohn]

Well, they are just like Apple.

Every chance they get they either step on their Di(k or shoot themselves in the foot.

[klosters64a]

The non success of OS/2 came about mainly because BBB told Tier One OEM's that they'd be paying a lot more for Win95(an extra ~$35) if they had the temerity to ship any boxes with OS/2. If I remember right, which isn't always. And IBM screwed up the marketing, too.

By that time, the only OS that many folks ever heard of was Win. I'm told that NT4 is OS/2.

[eobard]

Yeah but as I remember it several companies told Bill where to go and what to do when he got there and Bill was forced to back off with the hard ball. It took the MIGHTY POWERS of IBM to destroy their own creation. Just like their lack of support drove micro channel into an early grave. Micro channel in 87, OS/2 Warp in 94, it's been another 7 years now. Any guesses on which innovation they're gonna stangle in it's crib this time?

[Richard]

There's actually a new version of OS/2 that has just been released. As soon as I think of the name I'll get back with you. :)

Update: As promised: http://www.ecomstation.com/

[AmbientFiction]

What O/S2 itsn't freeware. I'm looking at prices like 2 grand.
I'm going to look around the site you left Rich

[Daniel ~]

A major screw up was that it was supposed to be compatible with MS-OS. I had three different computer stores try to dual boot, all three failed. I was green as grass back then and gave it up.

[eobard]

I never had a problem with dual boot, maybe it was the hardware you had at the time. The original OS/2 WARP (version 3) had a much smaller collection of hardware pieces that it was compatible with than 95 did.

[David]

Would IBM not just forget about OS/2 because they already have AIX5L to cover the enterprise market?

[David]

sorry, as an addition to the other post, I had a Mirco Channel PC. It was a 486 DX4 w/ 16meg of RAM It cost me £70 in Summer 2k! I took home, discovered the Graphics chip was pathetic and opened it up. I saw no long balck slots, no short white ones, but these brown things. I was really p*ssed off when I founfd out IU had a computer following a standard that went out of date 13 years ago!

[eobard]

Micro channel is useless now but in 87 when it came out it was miles ahead of ISA which was the only other choice at the time. Faster bus speed, wider bus width, up to 16 serial ports running off 1 interrupt. Lets see ISA do that!

[parkan]

I never got to deal with os/2 (it was not popular in Russia. I'm not even sure it shipped there), but judging from the fact that NT is based on it, it looks like a much more decent system then win9*. I wonder if I can get an old computer running it (another entry to my whishlist, already containing NeXT cube and Apple LISA :)