Of course not all of it is MS fault.

But when you go back to the beginning.  It seems MS started it.
I use to go into computer stores and any time I saw an IBM PC running
Windows, I went to a DOS prompt and key in VERS.  It always came back MS
DOS xxx.  Should have been IBM DOS on an IBM PC.  But MS already had
their licensing hooks sunk in.

What if, that didn't happen?  
Would OS/2 have been the NT of the world?

I had the same kind of problems installing Linux on PCs as I did with
OS/2.  

The Battery meter on my Thinkpad, 
Wifi connection on my Thinkpad,
Cooling on my Thinkpad,
all just didn't work with previous releases of Suse.  But Suse 10 seems
to have corrected them (2 years after I got the laptop).

I have had much better luck with OS/2 with the hardware features of the
day.  I'm not saying that OS/2 would do justice to current hardware
features, but for the day, it did pretty good.  (as long as you didn't
buy the cheapest crap around)

In 2005, I finally migrated all of my home/office stuff from OS/2 to
Linux.  OS/2 very seldom required a reboot (perhaps once or twice a
year).  Most of the time, it was up for 8-10 months at a time.  Linux
seems to stay up for a month or more.  But I'm still playing with it,
and hence I reboot it.  So I don't know if it stays up the same length
as OS/2.  

However, on the mainframe, I've had Linux images up for over 8 months
before I elected to take them down (scheduled maintenance type of
thing).



Tom Duerbusch
THD Consulting

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/23/2005 1:41:47 PM >>>
Tom Duerbusch wrote:

>It wasn't IBM's fault.  It was underhanded, illegal acts by
Microsoft.
>  
>
Oh, they certainly had a part in it. But so did IBM. There was this
attitude that hardware vendors should write the drivers all
themselves,
which led to many users not being able to install OS/2. M$, which
had taken that attitude at first, had changed their minds for the 1994
launching of NT 3.5 before the 1994 launching of Warp.

Also, as noted in my previous post, Warp was generally hard to install
compared to NT 3.5.

I was a beta developer for NT 3.1 -- had stuff on the early M$ disks.
I switched to OS/2 because the kernel and the TCP/IP stack on OS/2
were better. But PM crashed regularly. Windows on NT 3.5 almost
never crashed.

IBM never *really* grokked consumer operating systems. The
first OS/2 literature I read in 1988 referred to a 386 running
OS/2 as "a programmable [mainframe] terminal" which was the zeitgeist
in IBM --- still a glass house that late in the game.

So it can't ALL be blamed on M$, sons-of-others-than-their-fathers
that they are. Which I said on VNET in 1994 and almost got fired
from IBM for saying so!

-- 
Jack J. Woehr                 # "I never played fast and loose with
the
PO Box 51, Golden, CO 80402   # Constitution. Never did and never
will."
http://www.well.com/~jax      # - Harry S Truman

Reply via email to