"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message
...
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:41:44 GMT
"BillW50" wrote in message
. ..
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 20:42:43 +0200
writes:
OS/2 is dead and gone, and although it was superior in design to
the old versions of Windows, it was not superior to NT.
Supposedly better in design, but OS/2 sucked in real life for many
of us! As only one OS/2 Win session had sound while the others was
soundless. And a good number of Windows applications would
routinely crashed under OS/2, but stable as a rock under Windows
3.1. Then the OS/2 GUI was unstable for at least a couple of years
and crashed the whole system. Then the FixPaks often caused more
problems than they fixed. IBM programmers are morons!
Am I the only guy that was working with this crap back then?
Nope!
IBM contracted with M$ to write OS/2 for them in like 1987.
It might have been in '86 actually. And MS had been working on Windows
since about '84. Although MS couldn't give the development time it
deserved because those MS programmers were mostly working on OS/2. MS
lost 3 years in Windows development because of OS/2.
M$ drug their feet on the release, while spending IBM's money, so
that they could get Win 3.0 out before OS/2, by saying that OS/2
just wasn't stable enough for release yet. Yeah, no conflict of
interest their.
IBM only paid MS for the lines of code MS produced. IBM didn't care if
MS spent more time to make the code lean, mean and faster. As IBM would
pay you less if you did so. IBM was cutting their own throats. IBM is
full of a much of morons. Impossible to work with and to get paid fairly
for. Hell I would work slowly and drag my feet as well for those morons.
Finally IBM got fed up and took the project away from M$.
Yeah, IBM got fed up alright! As Microsoft didn't want to be a slave to
IBM (who always makes slaves or crushes anybody that gets in their way
up to this point in time). And IBM wanted MS to create OS/2 which would
be made to run on only true IBM PCs after they have the world hooked on
OS/2.
Yeah that is a great plan for us, NOT! Bill Gates had taken the biggest
risk in his career. As nobody ever bucked IBM and had survived. Although
he did it! And thank goodness he did! As we all would be using real IBM
machines and OS/2 by now.
Sure IBM was ticked that Bill Gates wasn't going to play along. So they
parted ways. And IBM wouldn't sell any IBM computer with Windows
installed for a short time. Until IBM realized that they couldn't sell
IBM computers with either crappy PC-DOS or OS/2 on them. As
people wanted Windows instead, plain and simple.
There are very many suspicious similarities in "bugs" within the
graphics system calls of Win 3.0 and OS/2.
The same MS programmers wrote both OS/2 and Windows 3.0. So why should
this be a surprise?
______________________________________________
Bill (using a Toshiba 2595XDVD & Windows 2000)
-- written and edited within Word 2000