3 ms·

And that then helped to kill OS/2 only because it delayed the release of OS/2 2.0 as that version needed a 386 to run. OS/2 2.0 used features found in the 386

by jussij 5y ago

And that then helped to kill OS/2 only because it delayed the release of OS/2 2.0 as that version needed a 386 to run. OS/2 2.0 used features found in the 386 to greatly improve the MS-DOS experience. IBM instead kept pushing the OS/2 1.x versions all of which had very bad support for MS-DOS applications. That delay was a massive bonus for Microsoft as it gave them time to work on Windows 95, which used the same 386 CPU features to deliver similar improvements in running MS-DOS applications.

redis_mlc 5y ago
What killed OS/2 was that Gordon Letwin at Microsoft figured out a couple lines of assembler to switch Windows into protected mode. Microsoft then stopped their joint work on OS/2. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Letwin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Letwin (I did similar work on Minix 1.0 back in the day to use protected mode.) OS/2 was dead after that except maybe in factory automation. (ie. Heinz had an automation project in the late 80's to use OS/2 for a ketchup plant.)
meepmorp 5y ago
Yeah, but also remember that Windows NT started as the next version of OS/2 after MS and IBM stopped collaborating. The UI was basically the presentation manager from os/2 until 4.0, and MS provided OS/2 APIs in NT.
- D13Fd 5y ago
  I think you may be misremembering. Windows NT 3.51 had a UI that generally mirrored Windows 3.1: https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/winnt351 https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/winnt351
  - meepmorp 5y ago
    You're totally right, I am. Thanks.
canucker2016 5y ago
Relased in late 1987, Windows 386/2.0 supported multiple DOS boxes using virtual 8086 mode. Win3.1 added some features which made windowed DOS boxes more usable. Win95 came three years after OS/2 and Win3.1 were released.