• mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    I remember in 1994 a friend had purchased OS2 for his 386dx with 8 (!!!) mind blowing megabytes of extended memory. OS2 took nearly 18 minutes to get to an interface you could use - not to install, to boot. went back to DOS lol.

    • mindlight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      If it was OS/2 from IBM it was true multitasking and the OS in full control of memory allocation, something Microsoft only were able to offer after creating a new operating system from scratch (Windows NT).

      If you thought OS/2 took forever to boot on a 386DX with only 8MB of ram, imagine how long it would take to boot Windows NT 3.5 on that same machine…

      • krimson@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        My dad ran IBM OS/2 Warp for a while on our PC. Rock stable. Shame it never really took off.

        • mindlight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          OS/2 3.0 “Warp” was a little too much ahead of its time and had the exact same problem that Windows Mobile had: no applications.

          IBM tried to solve that with Windows emulation but it was a headache from the start and often have a buggy experience.

          It didn’t help that the real world hardest requirements were off the charts as compared to Windows 95 (still 16-bit MS-Dos based and not even close to what OS/2 was).

          IBM did everything right from an engineering perspective but failed miserably on what the market wanted.

          It never stood a chance. IBM had always been great at delivering solutions that was well engineered. What IBM has n-e-v-e-r been good at is marketing and understanding the volume market.