Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Not Quite Mainstream OSes => Topic started by: Calum on 30 January 2003, 16:13
-
somebody recently said on these forums that there was no 'microsoft OS/2'. well according to this site, there was (http://toastytech.com/guis/MOS22.html). Just posting it to see what the thoughts are of the people...
OS/2 was originally developed as a combined effort between Microsoft and IBM and first released in 1987. Both IBM and Microsoft both released versions branded in their own names. OS/2 1.x was a 16-bit OS designed to run on the 80286.
-
I think Void Main was just saying that MS never *developed* OS/2 on their own i.e. IBM was there from the start.
-
oh. well i thought it meant that they both worked to create the same OS, when actually it looks like they used each other's data to make seperate but very similar OSs.
-
that's about the size of it.
MS used OS/2 to build NT. They mixed it with some VMS and some of their own crap, then got Dave Cutler who also worked on Mach with Avie Tavinion to make a kernel that didn't suck so bad.
Oh, oops. I don't think something worked. It still sucks.
-
in the beginning, their was a good os, working and being well. soon management steps in and adds everything and i mean that kitchen sink too. and then it wasn't a good os
-
This was kinda a screw-up on IBM's part, they went to CP/M and I guess the "master of the house" wasn't home so they went to Microsoft. Microsoft, which didn't have the CP/M rip-off IBM wanted, bought out another OS, QDOS, which was disigned by a programmer that used to work for the company that made OS/2. Kind of a friend of a friend of a guy that knew this person that was high up there. Even in the early days, microsoft was ripping people off. The only thing they did make was the BASIC language, which was designed by his gateness before he reached the state he's in now. Gotta hand it to him on that, although rumours and stories say that he put it together one night as a last minute cram thing; even in the early days it was put together without care or thought. Bastards.
-------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry, I didn't realize OS/2 was seperate from QDOS, But no, I doubt that M$ actually came up with it by themselves. I'm not sure about it's origins, but it was probably bought from some low level company where the owner just wanted to live like a fat fucking king the rest of his life. Pardon my french.
[ June 09, 2003: Message edited by: Neo_Linux_User ]
-
[ June 09, 2003: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]
Actually, IBM and Microsoft were the ones who developped OS/2, much later after Gates licensed them QDOS, which was from Seattle Computing. QDOS was an illegal rip-off based on a reverse engineered version of CP/M. Gary Kildall, the author of CP/M, was one of Gates' friends.
[ June 09, 2003: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]
And no, Bill Gates did not write BASIC.
[ June 09, 2003: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]
-
Bill Gates did not invent BASIC. It was in the Public Domain, and all he did was port it to the Altair computer and claim it as his own. Even back in those days, he would crack down on competitors, accusing them of pirating "his" BASIC.
-
BASIC was developed at Dartmouth college in 1964 by John Kemeny and Thomas Kurtz.
the internet agrees with me (http://www.google.com/search?q=dartmouth%20basic%201964%20chronology&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8) :D
-
Well, OUCH, I will promptly shut the hell up then. My bad, I guess a gates has always been a rip off. Fucking asshole. You know, there are plenty of ways to become the richest man in the world, he had it set from the beginning, benmg born into a rich family was what set it all up for him. Sorry, my facts are never all that reliable-I guess some sites like to cover up the fact that he's a hack, a no talent ripo-off-I'll be careful which ones I believe in the future. This shit was al before my time anyway, so from now on I'll stay outta stuff I know nothing about.
-
don't take it personally!
i am amazed at how many people i appear to piss off simply by pointing out facts.
it wasn't anything personal!
as you say though, there is a lot of poorly researched microsoft fueled BS on the internet today.
edit: incidentally re: OS/2 it turns out that IBM paid microsoft to develop OS/2 (like it had paid them to "develop" DOS) and microsoft decided at the same time they would use the profits from IBM to do their own similar product. Their Windows would be only an add on to DOS, so while it would still be technically limited to the capabilities of their ripped off version of DOS, it would be cheaper than OS/2 and would have the benefit of being installable on an existing DOS machine. IBM got very shirty about it all, saying that microsoft should not be trying to compete with the very product IBM were paying them to produce.
[ June 12, 2003: Message edited by: Calum ]
-
IBM paid Microsoft to write the GUI of OS/2 (you know, the windows 3.1 interface), not the system. IBM wrote the kernel of OS/2, which was multitasking and command-line, like UNIX. After they broke up, IBM wrote their own interface for OS/2 warp 3, and Microsoft used part of the code (which they may or may not have written) in Windows NT.
Neo, it's OK to make mistakes. People have short memories, and the internet was not commonplace back then, so it very easy for MS advocates to change history, willingly or not.