Well... I managed to install and run OS/2 Warp 4 on a virtual machine. I just have one thing to say... in my opinion Windows 95 was better.
As I understand it, OS/2 was too little too late. Has Microsoft not released Win95 when they did, and the comparison was Win3.1 vs OS/2 things may have been somewhat different.
39 diskettes. The interface made me think of the Mac. Capable of running 16-bit Windows applications. If IBM had marketed it more wisely (and hadn't bound it to the limits of the 286 processor) most computers would be running OS/2 now. In fact, Windows XP and Vista are based on OS/2 1.x instead of 16-bit Windows (up to 3.11) or Chicago-kernel Windows (9x/ME). Windows NT (later 2000, XP, and Vista) was originally Microsoft NT OS/2.
Wow! A 'technology' thread that I could comment on! When I started working 13 years ago it was with IBM, and we were using OS2 Warp. My maching NEVER crashed or got hung up using it. But while I was there we finally 'gave up' and switched to windows, and those early versions were bad for that. It's very rare now for me to have to reboot during the day. There - that's as technical as I get!
Which is amusing, considering that the NT system is when they finally got over the stability problems that plagued MS for years (and, in doing so, really deprived us of a lot of BSoD jokes).
OS/2 actually has some stability problems... if a graphical program stops responding, it can crash the Presentation Manager and effectively bring down the system. Plus, its architecture makes it as vulnerable as Windows regarding viruses.
