View Single Post
  #117   Report Post  
Anthony Fremont
 
Posts: n/a
Default The truth about OS/2!!! [ Why aren't computer clocks as accurate as cheap quartz watches?]


"BillW50" wrote in message
. ..

"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.


I suppose that's one way to look at the time that M$ spent sucking money
from IBM and using it for their own gains.

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

I think IBM had visions of stability that M$ will never attain, ever.

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.

Yeah, morons. They only own the mainframe market even though Honeywell
made better hardware. IBM's only moronic move was to allow M$ to screw
them for a second time. The first time being with MSDOS/IBMDOS games.

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


Too bad that isn't true since they would have done the world a great
favor by crushing M$.

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.


Actually, if Gates wasn't so good at being greedy, we'd all be using
something that actually worked. OS/2 was crap too. Too bad Xerox
didn't have sense enough to stay in the game, they had the best product
for the office in 1980. Apple didn't have anything that could come
close for around 10 years. It took M$ almost another 5 years on top of
that to catch up.

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.


The only reason being that M$ delayed OS/2 was so that Win 3.0 could get
the jump on it. If OS/2 would have shipped on time, it would have
possibly eliminated windows.

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?


It's not a surprise to me. I think it just goes to show that M$ had no
qualms about directly lifting the code that they originally wrote for
IBM using IBM's money and, AFAICT, IBM's design goals. I'm not saying
that was illegal back then, but it certainly wouldn't happen in today's
IP obsessed world without bringing about major court battles.

Here was a true visionary:
http://www.cadigital.com/kildall.htm

You obviously really like M$ so there probably isn't much point in
continuing this until it becomes a real ****ing contest. I run windos
on some machines because I basically have to. When I need something
that really works, I use Linux. :-)