Re: Andrew Tanenbaum AP story

gnuoytr_at_rcn.com (robert) wrote:

>Gene Wirchenko <genew_at_mail.ocis.net> wrote in message news:<trtgo01dim6nif8bahosu0i98bfpb91nst_at_4ax.com>...

[snip]

>> I remember the whining of the OS/2 aficionados. OS/2 was
>> technically superior to MS-DOS, etc., etc. What they missed was that
>> MS-DOS was good enough,
>
>if i remember my history correctly, the ascendence of DOS was not that
>it was good enough. rather, Lotus could only afford to build 1-2-3
>(a wholly assembler program for its first 3(?) releases) for one
>platform
>and chose DOS. it was the killer app that made DOS. IBM sold the PC
>with the user's choice: CP/M-86, UCSD-P system, or PC-DOS. if you
>wanted 1-2-3, you didn't have a choice. then, M$ was allowed to make
>and enforce restrictive contracts such that clones couldn't (in
>reality) be
>sold with anything else.
>
>users never really made the decision. manufacturers did.

     So why did they not switch to OS/2? MS-DOS was good enough, regardless of how they got to that point. In most people's opinion, it was not worth the switch.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:

     I have preferences.
     You have biases.
     He/She has prejudices.