3 ms·

It came a few years to early. I remember my shock when I get [1] my OS/2 copy and it was on 10 (yes, ten!) 3.5 inch Floppy Disk, while Windows needed two (one f

It came a few years to early. I remember my shock when I get [1] my OS/2 copy and it was on 10 (yes, ten!) 3.5 inch Floppy Disk, while Windows needed two (one for main OS, one for some utilities). [1] This was 1987 still communistic Poland, so I bought a pirated copy on a famous Warsaw computer bazaar on Grzybowska street.

sixothree 2y ago
Agreed. Their timing was not right. But once Windows 95 hit, it was over. Also, the RAM requirements made it pretty much impossible for people to recommend to their friends and family. I really had a special fondness for OS/2. But using it today, it really is a quirky thing. Maybe if it had won I wouldn't be thinking that way.
- lproven 2y ago
  > Their timing was not right. I agree. https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/05/microsoft_os2_flop_future/ https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/05/microsoft_os2_flop_fu... I think OS/2 1.x should have targeted the 386, in the 1980s. > Also, the RAM requirements made it pretty much impossible for people to recommend to their friends and family. I bought OS/2 2.0 with my own cash, and ran it on several different 386SX machines in 4MB of RAM. It was usable on that spec. Any good spec of machine for Windows 3.0 could run OS/2 2.x usefully without being unpleasant.
lproven 2y ago
I don't think you are remembering correctly. > It came a few years to early. I remember my shock when I get [1] my OS/2 copy and it was on 10 (yes, ten!) 3.5 inch Floppy Disk Not so bad, really. > while Windows needed two (one for main OS, one for some utilities). No version of Windows came on 1 floppy. Windows 1.01 took 4 360k disks -- here's a picture: https://www.firstversions.com/2015/05/microsoft-windows.html https://www.firstversions.com/2015/05/microsoft-windows.html Windows 2 took 8 360k disks: https://archive.org/details/microsoft-windows-v2.0 https://archive.org/details/microsoft-windows-v2.0 Windows 3 took 8 even on DS DD 720kB disks: https://archive.org/details/windows_3.00_english_with_ms-dos_6.22_eng https://archive.org/details/windows_3.00_english_with_ms-dos... By Windows 95 it was up to 27 high density 1.4MB disks: https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/uopb1n/the_27_installation_disks_of_windows_95/ https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/uopb1n/t... 10 is not bad at all for a full preemptive multitasking x86-32 OS with a GUI, IMHO.

sixothree 2y ago

Agreed. Their timing was not right. But once Windows 95 hit, it was over. Also, the RAM requirements made it pretty much impossible for people to recommend to their friends and family. I really had a special fondness for OS/2. But using it today, it really is a quirky thing. Maybe if it had won I wouldn't be thinking that way.

lproven 2y ago
> Their timing was not right. I agree. https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/05/microsoft_os2_flop_future/ https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/05/microsoft_os2_flop_fu... I think OS/2 1.x should have targeted the 386, in the 1980s. > Also, the RAM requirements made it pretty much impossible for people to recommend to their friends and family. I bought OS/2 2.0 with my own cash, and ran it on several different 386SX machines in 4MB of RAM. It was usable on that spec. Any good spec of machine for Windows 3.0 could run OS/2 2.x usefully without being unpleasant.

lproven 2y ago

I don't think you are remembering correctly. > It came a few years to early. I remember my shock when I get [1] my OS/2 copy and it was on 10 (yes, ten!) 3.5 inch Floppy Disk Not so bad, really. > while Windows needed two (one for main OS, one for some utilities). No version of Windows came on 1 floppy. Windows 1.01 took 4 360k disks -- here's a picture: https://www.firstversions.com/2015/05/microsoft-windows.html https://www.firstversions.com/2015/05/microsoft-windows.html Windows 2 took 8 360k disks: https://archive.org/details/microsoft-windows-v2.0 https://archive.org/details/microsoft-windows-v2.0 Windows 3 took 8 even on DS DD 720kB disks: https://archive.org/details/windows_3.00_english_with_ms-dos_6.22_eng https://archive.org/details/windows_3.00_english_with_ms-dos... By Windows 95 it was up to 27 high density 1.4MB disks: https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/uopb1n/the_27_installation_disks_of_windows_95/ https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/uopb1n/t... 10 is not bad at all for a full preemptive multitasking x86-32 OS with a GUI, IMHO.