RE: The Future of IBM ..

Also M$ has made it a point to make sure their stuff is in the school
systems...IBM, well, they're so arrogant that they think you should be
coming to them on bended knee for everything.....you can clearly see what
the marketplace thinks of that :)



-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of DrFranken
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 10:23 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: The Future of IBM ..

Spot on. One of my friends here locally was an OS/2 sales guy for IBM.
He had a couple small successes like Ford Motor Company and The
University of Michigan. However when the Devkit issue came up IBM
wouldn't even give it to those guys with 20,000 seats of OS/2!!

- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis

www.frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com
www.iInTheCloud.com

On 7/1/2013 10:16 AM, Dan Kimmel wrote:

The real reason Windows succeeded and OS/2 didn't: Microsoft gave their

devkit away, IBM wanted something like $6000 for theirs.

I was fairly well established as a software developer when Windows and

OS/2 first came out. For some reason, probably because I had a yellow pages
listing under Software Development, I started receiving complete pre-release
versions of the Windows devkit in the mail every couple of weeks as they'd
work through new versions. The decision as to which environment to learn was
simple. I already had machines that would run either of them. I got plenty
of cards in the mail from IBM, offering to sell me their devkit. So once
again, the difference was MARKETING.

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx

[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jon Paris

Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2013 10:49 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: The Future of IBM ..

To my memory Jerry this is the wrong way round.

IBM wrote their OS/2 components in C/C++ for portability to future

hardware platforms. Microsoft continued writing their pieces in assembler
despite having agreed earlier to use C/C++. They claimed that it was a
performance issue - but there were rumours that keeping Intel sweet by
effectively tying themselves to the Intel platform was part of the picture.

MS were supposed, as part of the OS/2 agreement, to stop development on

future versions of Windows. They didn't.

On 2013-06-29, at 6:49 PM, Jerry C. Adams <midrange@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

OS/2 was written in Assembler, which is not, well, very transportable.
At the same time that Microsoft was working on it, they were coding
Windows in C or C++, which is highly portable. [At least, that's what
I heard while at a conference at the Palisades conference center eons
ago - which, by the way, had OS/2 PCs in every room.]

Jerry C. Adams
IBM i Programmer/Analyst
Queen Victoria loved _Alice in Wonderland_ and requested a copy of
Lewis Carroll's next book. It was _Syllabus of Plane Algebraical

Geometry_.

--

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com




--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing

list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe,
unsubscribe, or change list options,

visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a

moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.