3 ms·
The real joke is that the '32bit' version was written in parallel, and suppressed by IBM. You can read more, and actually run them here: https://www.pcjs.org/b
by scruffyherder 9y ago
The real joke is that the '32bit' version was written in parallel, and suppressed by IBM.
You can read more, and actually run them here:
https://www.pcjs.org/blog/2016/02/08/ https://www.pcjs.org/blog/2016/02/08/
It's a little touchy to get the 1987 version running ( https://www.pcjs.org/disks/pcx86/os2/misc/football/87058/ https://www.pcjs.org/disks/pcx86/os2/misc/football/87058/ ), but there it is, OS/2 1.0 hacked up with 32bit extensions to support multiple v86 machines. Windows/386 was a thing in 1987, along with Xenix on the 386. OS/2 could have been there too but IBM was too busy trying to cover base with the 5170, the brain dead 286 machine that dragged down the entire industry.
Between delaying the 32bit version for years, they also wouldn't let Microsoft just port over Windows to run ontop of OS/2. And of course SAA had to be 180 degrees opposite of Windows out of spite.
It's really no surprise that once Windows 3.0 started to sell, NT OS/2 3.0 suddenly became Windows NT 3.1