On: Gordon Letwin OS/2 Usenet post (1995)

[invalidname]

I am talking about 2.0 which was the IBM product mentioned in the post. 1.0 was still a joint product with Microsoft prior to the split.

[mrspuratic → invalidname]

When I was a student, around 1992-93, I did shift work for a few months in an MS production facility in Dublin. When it was slack I got assigned to degaussing floppies - most of them were "Microsoft OS/2 Version 1.0" install media. I never kept any for posterity :/

[lproven → mrspuratic]

You can download it here if you're nostalgic. ;-)

https://winworldpc.com/product/os-2-1x/10

No, I get your point, and in that position I'd have wished I kept a set, too, but it was not lost to history.

FWIW a beta of Microsoft OS/2 2.0 was found earlier this year and I wrote about it.

https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/11/trying_ms_prerelease_...

Yes, Microsoft 32-bit OS/2 two, not a typo.

[lproven → invalidname]

OK, just checking.

My point is, Letwin was wrong: it was not the apps that sank OS/2.

The 16-bit version killed its changes, and that did have some big-name native apps.

And it didn't need 8MB -- although it would not have objected.

[lproven → lproven]

* killed its chances