Linux Format forums

[Nuke]

Interesting two-part article on OS/2 from the point of view of an insider at the time :-

www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/23/why_os2_failed_part_one/

www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/26/os2_final_fail/

He gives a picture of utter disconnection between different divisions of IBM, and utter failure to appreciate the direction in which IT was moving.

OS/2 was good, I ran it for several years, and it could have become the standard for PCs if IBM's top management had been as bright as its own developers.

One thing puzzles me, the recent discussions on OS/2 (being its 25th anniversary) all complain how expensive it was. I do not recall that. In fact I remember at one point at least (in the UK) it being cheaper tham DOS + Windows 3.1, even the version with a copy of Windows built into it (which ran in a VM), yet people still bought Windows. OS/2 did like memory though - at £100 per Mb!).

They marketed that version as "OS/2 for Windows" - as if OS/2 were just some front end instead of a OS built from the ground up. It was really "Windows for OS/2". I despaired at that description. At the time, all sorts of software was being sold "for Windows" (eg "WordPerfect-for-Windows") and I felt that if things had come to such a pass that nothing in IT could be sold unless it had "For Windows" somewhere on it (I'm looking at a sticker on my laptop right now), then OS/2 was doomed.

It has taken so far 25 years for the "Windows" gloss even to begin to fade for Joe Sixpack.
_________________
Unsolved Mysteries of the Universe No 8 :-
Why did they do away with sinks with integral splashbacks?

[guy]

I recall OS/2 being expensive in the early days. It was pushed as a better Windows than Windows itself, so to the corporate mind that naturally demanded a higher price.

Its market failure was publicly ascribed to endemic Windows compatibility bugs that could not be fixed because Microsoft were not forthcoming with the necessary licenses. (Probably MS Office compatibility to be more accurate, but it was kind of hard to draw the line in those days).

I can't recall if OS/2 actually contained MS code - it may well have done - but it certainly incorporated Microsoft IP at a very deep level. IBM had concluded that this was the only way to achieve the compatibility that was essential to its success. Once it started to become a real competitor to Windows, MS fixed and updated Windows but made the necessary license updates prohibitively expensive and IBM balked (or, did MS refuse outright? It was a long time ago). IBM were outraged at MS breaking a promise to make this stuff available, but as it was only a promise and not a contract, IBM were stuffed. So OS/2 became outdated and permanently flakey under the bonnet, despite its advanced user-friendly features. Towards the end, the price did drop in a desperate attempt to build some kind of viable user base.

IBM were incompetent in some areas too, but it was the MS action that struck the lethal blow: after that, it was only a matter of time.

At least, that is the public story as I recall it.

Which led to my great surprise one day a decade or more later, when I happened to catch my local bank's hole-in-the-wall cash machine rebooting. The splash screen proudly announced it was OS/2.
_________________
Cheers,
Guy
The eternal noob

[Nuke]