From: https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=155912&cid=13069812 https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=155912&cid=1306981... Good luck with that son, bu

From: https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=155912&cid=13069812 https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=155912&cid=1306981... Good luck with that son, but I'm sorry to tell you that Microsft did NOT help IBM code OS/2 so it would run Windows. As a matter of fact, Microsoft did far more to STOP OS/2 from running Windows and Windows applications. When Microsoft was releasing betas of Chicago( Win95 ), IBM had Chicago apps running under OS/2. When Microsoft found out, they changed the OS so that a very small portion of the Win32 resources loaded up at the 1GB memory address. This was so OS/2 could not run ANY Chicago applications or the OS. It worked because OS/2 supported virtual memory up to 512MB. So you got that WAY WRONG. The bit about Microsoft licensing issues preventing opensourcing OS/2 is correct. LoB