News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:OS/2 2.0, Summer ’91 Edition by magoon on Sunday April 09, 2017 @10:07AM (#14072346)
Microsoft convinced IBM to use a single message queue despite protest from IBM. Perhaps they were purposely sabatoging the effort, as they clearly wanted their 386 fork (which became Windows NT) to have the upper hand.
Re:OS/2 2.0, Summer ’91 Edition by mcguire on Sunday April 09, 2017 @11:14AM (#14072655)
Anecdotally, that was kind of the feeling at IBM about several of the misfeatures of OS/2 in 1990-92, when I worked there with OS/2.

Typical conversation:

"Why the hell does..."

"Microsoft."

"Right."

Re:OS/2 2.0, Summer ’91 Edition by JdeBP on Monday April 10, 2017 @02:47AM (#14076546)
And the feeling of mis-features being the other company's fault was mutual. Microsoft people viewed the introduction of more UNIX-like features into MS-DOS/PC-DOS 2 as happening despite the strenuous objections of IBM, for example.

People do this. I've seen this happen in places that have nothing to do with IBM or Microsoft. Problems and misfeatures are all the fault of that group of incompetent outsiders in that company over there that we have a business deal with. It is rarely actually true, in my experience.

Re:OS/2 2.0, Summer ’91 Edition by yuhong on Sunday April 09, 2017 @02:06PM (#14073526)
In any case, it probably wasn't that hard to fix and OS/2 2.0 would have been a good time to fix it.