Philip Sheard wrote:
Was that the 2.99 beta? OS/2 was indeed a lot better than Windows, but it
was not to be.
It was not down to Microsoft, though. They did not indulge in any more dirty
tricks than one would expect, from a company in their position. IBM did it
all by themselves. We were phenomenally incompetent.
IMO the biggest single factor was the cartel on RAM memory. At the time
manufacturers were all charging a whopping $25 per megabyte. OS/2 needed 8MB
to run comfortably, but Windows 3 was happy with 4MB. And the leading member
of the cartel was...
Well, it CLAIMED to be happy with 4MB but I never met anyone who
actually was able to do useful work with less than 8. And the
compromises required to make Win95 run in that restricted space were
what finally killed it. We've got a box running VM in/on OS/2 and it's
been running for eons. I'd never even consider trying something like
that with a WinDoze OS of any variety.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kent Loobey [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 14 January 2009 18:25
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: Re: Are you feeling special?
On Wednesday 14 January 2009 02:45:45 you wrote:
Palm is making the same mistake that IBM did. In a previous incarnation I
was head of OS/2 evangelization for IBM EMEA (yes, I am a very old guy). I
helped to set up devcon, but by then it was already too late. Almost no
consumer software was ever developed for OS/2. Microsoft are crap
developers themselves, but they sure know how to encourage other
people.
I'm an old guy too. I was in the OS/2 beta program. I loved OS/2 and was
really bummed when it didn't prevail in the market place.
Microsoft fights dirty but for some reason the general public doesn't notice
or
doesn't care.
So we get crap from MS.
--
For information on using the ACCESS Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please
see http://www.access-company.com/developers/forums/
