Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Ah yes, OS/2. What fond memories. In fact, I still have my Blue & White OS/2 Warp box sitting on my shelves.

Those incompetent tits at IBM royally screwed up that OS/2 which was not only far superior to Windoze at the time, but was less crash prone. No wonder IBM has gone down the tubes. I mean seriously, selling an American icon company to - of all people - the Chinese - is nothing but the pits IMO.

Anyway, IBM have won a lawsuit against Microsoft.

Posted

The biggest problem with OS/2 was that it required WAY too much RAM (around 128MB) While Win95 only needed about 32MB of RAM. Insignificant amounts today, but back then when RAM was $200.00 for a 16MB Chip, that was a LOT of money. You basically needed to add about $1400.00 worth of RAM to the average computer for it to be able to run without resorting to the swap drive every 5 seconds.

Posted

quote:

Originally posted by Darkling:

The biggest problem with OS/2 was that it required WAY too much RAM (around 128MB)

I think that is if you ran windows apps on it. It would create a virtual machine with almost the entire win 3.x O/S loaded into it (about 4-8 MB per app). This was unlike the way NT worked which just loaded stubs.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...