One thing I should have mentioned, and apologize for not catching sooner, is that OS/2 actually still exists today as ArcaOS! This was pointed out to me by OS2World's Twitter account. I highly recommend checking out their forums at www.os2world.com/forum/index.php for all things OS/2, as this is pretty much the authoritative source on all sorts of information. Thanks again to all of your for watching and for all of the kind words and support, I really do appreciate it!

I worked at IBM in Boca Raton in the early 90s. The entire campus was working on OS 2 Warp. I worked in the Win-OS2 area, where we debugged Windows apps that wouldn't run in Win-OS2. We had full source code to Windows 3.11 Windows for Workgroups. We ran Windows code as-is except for the memory calls. Much like installing a virus, whenever a Windows DLL is loaded, it checked to see if there was a file with the same name as the DLL but with the extension .scr. .scr (script) files essentially patched the DLL in-memory instance to change calls to Windows memory functions (malloc, halloc, etc) to instead call the OS2 memory functions. But the really fun part was going around to the various test labs. They had entire rooms where people did nothing but play games trying to get the games to break. That's where I saw my first movie playing on a CDRom drive. It was really cool being part of such a big project. However I have to say that it was really a race because we knew Windows 95 was coming out soon. Microsoft was already creating a buzz about Windows 95 and when it finally did come out that was the nail in the coffin for OS2.

OS/2 was awesome! Super stable and with great performance, even when emulating Windows and DOS environments. For example I used to play the original WindCommander games for DOS _in_ _a_ _window_ (something that was not possible in Windows) without performance issues on my 486DX2/66.

I used OS/2 Warp for several years as a programmer. I really miss those days, programming today doesn't even resemble what we did back then. OS/2 Warp was a breath of fresh air compared to anything else.

I wrote my first video game for OS/2, back when it was a 16 bit OS. I had "Microsoft OS/2" that I'd picked up to run on my 286 (with a whopping 3mb of RAM). Tetris was the big game at the time, and it didn't work very well in the "DOS Penalty Box" (as we called it). So I wrote my own - TetrOS/2. It was a character mode app at first, but when I got OS/2 2.0, I made a Presentation Manager version that in retrospect looked a lot like Minesweeper did later. Since I was a student at the time and very few people I knew were using OS/2, I only wound up sharing these games with a few friends. Even without the PM though, being able to screen swap between my editor, a command line (Zortek C forever!) and a terminal program to connect with the school's Unix machines was a dream for a late 80's CompSci student. Alas, I never wound up running Warp.

Microsoft had completely cancelled Windows and was 100% all-in with their co-development of OS/2. What happened? As documented in the book "Barbarians Led by Bill Gates" that came out in 1998, .. a Microsoft Intern got permission to work on the Windows source code on their own time... and they got it working in real-mode with protected memory on the 386. When Bill found out and validated it, the company decided to revive Windows and started exiting the OS/2 collab.

Back in the 90s, I ran OS/2, starting from 2.0, on a 386 DX system. I also provided third level OS/2 support at IBM Canada, in the late 90s. I was also on the team that built standard desktops for IBM Canada employees. I used OS/2 as my main OS until a bit over 20 years ago, when I switched to Linux. However, I still have Warp 4 in a Virtualbox VM on my ThinkPad E520.

Just a bit of color for folks who weren't around or not using computers in 1994 when OS/2 Warp came out -- running DOS and Windows on top of OS/2 -- this was decades before hardware virtualization was built into CPUs, thus it was not possible to truly run both OSes on the bare metal with full access to all system resources, OS/2 did an amazing job running DOS/Windows as an application in a set-aside bit of system memory and sharing its own resources with whatever was running inside that DOS box. For the time it was amazing.

Back in the late 90s there was the story that M$ actually blackmailed the biggest computer shop we had in Germany namely Vobis that if they would continued sell OS/2 they wouldn’t be allowed to sell M$ Windoze anymore. And remembering how evil M$ was back then I feel that this might have been true.

I used OS/2 for many years. Loved it. It was way ahead of its time. Much better than Windows. Used to crash a lot. Then NT 4 came out and that was the end of OS/2.

you are also missing some of the fundamental things - like IBM Mainframe connectivity, also REXX programming language. The desktop was generated on the fly - so helped with performance.

Thank you for your kind and FAIR assessment of the GREAT OS/2! Well done! 👍🏻

I remember the day we got our hands on a copy of OS/2 Warp, installed in on my friends machine and it blew me away, it felt cutting edge.

When I was a university student, IBM came to our campus with a presentation on OS/2 v3, and handed out free copies to us. There was such demand, they ran out of the discs quickly, we had to register for a later shipment. I still have it on my shelf. It was a marvel, a truly great technical achievement in the time of win3.1, but nobody had the hardware to run it smoothly. When we finally had the horsepower to use it, NT4 was there. Also, there was no practical use for it, all our everyday tasks, homework assignments, games, etc. was available on windows anyway. I loved OS/2, but never used it apart from a few test installations.

Great video! Thanks so much for your time. It is wonderful to see your generation interested in OS history. I am an ex IBMer certified in multiple operating systems including Warp 3 and 4. One commenter hit the nail on the head. The lack of drivers for non-IBM PC's was the death knell of OS/2. Their arrogance in not licensing other manufacturers to produce 'Micro Channel' technology is what brought about the 'ISA' interface bypassing IBM's technology all together. ISA then lead to EISA , VESA and then PCI. Just a bit of info on OS/2. The US military, government, financial institutions as well as all Canadian banks ran OS/2. It would run an ATM without a reboot for sometimes years, as well as run without re-imaging until the HDD would fail. It had a true 32bit kernel. Windows 95 on the other hand ran two 16bit kernels back to back but it bundled drivers for almost any PC. It was marketed with much more skill than OS/2, but in my opinion set the PC world back 20 years from where we should be now. Windows NT4(also and MCSE in that) was Microsoft's version of OS/2 but had the worst HAL (hardware abstraction layer) making it an absolute bear to configure for hardware. It took over the banking environment in Canadian banking around 1999. At that time the hardware techs at IBM were issued re-imaging software for all the ATM's as NT would constantly be failing. It wasn't until Windows 2000(MCSE again) did MS hit a home run and the financial institutions would finally enjoy a more stable IT environment. Keep up the great work. LGE Chatsworth, Ontario

It ran windows programs much faster than windows could. Same for DOS programs. Everything was responsive and stable. It answered all my needs at work. So much so that I installed at home, too.

The first GUI interface library software ran on OS/2. I was familiar with it due to a brief stint selling for CompUSA and loved a 32 bit multitasker. When I took over a seminary library and I was given the task of automating it OS/2 and that software (name escapes me - 'twas in 1994!) was the platform. We even ran the Lotus Smartsuite for OS/2 for our apps. The seminary went with NT for the other systems but OS/2 needed less hardware and ran cleaner and faster. Until, IBM dropped the ball.

I used OS/2 Warp in an office situation from its introduction the early 2000s. Previously I had used DOS with a collection of related programs. OS/2 allowed me to expand those options into Windows software and run programs in a far more stable environment. With Microsoft refusing to license IBM to incorporate later versions of Windows, I ran into a terminate problem needing to file and recover legal documents from state and federal court systems, so I had to bend the knee. It took me years to get over IBM's complete failure to draw in and support software developers so OS/2 could be sustained, but IBM only saw the operating system as a remote operating system for its main frame systems and had little interest in advancing OS/2 as an alternative to Windows.

This was a great round up of OS/2's functions. It was incredibly fun watching this, I couldn't take my eyes off of it. I've always been curious about this OS. If I ever get a big box of this one I'll probably try and install it in one of the retro systems. Thanks for another great video, Will.

This is really cool because I've never used OS/2 before. I started on Windows 3.1 back on a 386 and used Windows ever since. I've always seen screenshots of OS/2 before but never knew its history or how it worked. Really enjoyed this!

I remember connecting my blue OS/2 machine to the net using DOS ProComm, writing on OS/2 WordPerfect with Windows Minesweeper on the side... LOL Kind of understood the mentality behind "It's Alive! It's Alive!' way ahead of its time and was happy with it until Linux came along.

OS/2 was a very interesting OS. It's biggest problems were lack of drivers for most third party devices and the lack of a killer must-have application. One interesting thing to note was the use of a dock in Warp 3 before Apple ever used a dock. Unfortunately IBM chose to follow Microsoft's lead and ditched the dock in favor a Start menu-like interface in Warp 4. Coincidentally, I'm tying to get an IBM PS/2 286 back into working condition so I can play around with OS/2 v1.3, but the ESDI hard drives in this line of computers seem to be incredibly fault-prone and difficult to find a working drive. Anyway, good video showing off the multitasking capabilities of OS/2.

OS/2 on a 286 was an absolutely remarkable technical achievement, but it was a massive mistake. Watch Dave Cutler's oral history interview with CHM where he discusses Windows NT being worked on for i860, PowerPC and MIPs R4x00 series FIRST and having to add back the i386 as an after-thought. Windows NT was in progress because Microsoft thought Intel weren't keeping up with RISC processors.

Some DOS software did *funky* things with sound cards. This is why they don't sound ok in an OS/2 MDVM. IIRC John Carmack himself commented about this. When ID Software had a server breach and Quake source code got leaked. In under a week, someone made a proper native OS/2 port of Quake. 😉

Great video! I never used OS/2 3.x before so was interesting to see. I played around with warp 4.x a while back. Thanks for sharing!

I worked for IBM Global Services in the late 90s, OS/2 Warp was amazing! We used it as our primary OS as Windows 3.x would crash constantly and require a computer reboot whereas OS/2 Warp would just gracefully shut the offending app down.

I was working in the insurance industry at the time ans OS/2 was the envy of everyone around me - I loved it!

My first PC was an IBM Aptiva for Christmas of '95. It came dual loaded with windows 3.1 and os2 warp. I tinkered around with it some and tried out the cd rom they included with some games on it iirc. It was ok, but I found myself not really needing to use it so I kept switching back to windows. Microsoft included a coupon for a free windows 95 upgrade disk. Once I got that in the mail it was over for os2 lol. Windows '95 said it would have to uninstall os2 warp and I was like no problem.

One of the big reasons it failed. When released, it only shipped with IBM print drivers. That was the reason we passed on it.

I had access to Version 4 from early betas up to nearly finished product. The thing almost never crashed - only few early builds weren't too stable. A nice, snappy workhorse OS.

I really enjoy those goofy sound effects for closing and opening programs.

Back in the day, I was just mesmerized for being able to play solitaire while installing the OS/2..

I bought OS/2 for my home PC so I could run a BBS and do whatever else I wanted on a single computer. I could get on the internet on my other line, play DOOM, browse the web, etc. It was ahead of everything at the time.

In 1989 we got a Dell 386/25 and Windows 386 as well as OS2, which we never used. Windows was a disaster and had extreme memory limitations. It also wasn’t able to print to out Postscript laser printer. We bought a few Macs and they were light years ahead, being able to use all of the installed memory and easily print to a networked postscript printer.

I developed office software similar to Microsoft Access in ‘92. It was great, but yes too much documentation to wade through(in line with Unix) and the dev kit was good, but behind Microsoft. The OS ran great.

LOVED OS/2 Warp - Was able to run 5 complete separate Warp sessions on a computer as a Bulletin Board (BBS). That had 4 modems to answer 4 calls at once and a 5th for my use on the terminal. It worked great and very fast. This was way back in 1994

Man I miss those days... I used to run OS/2 Warp. I was always in hyperterminal BBS Hopping. 😊😊

The WPS was in 1993 - 1998 way ahead of Win and even Apple. A completly object orientend workspace with templates, light tables for pictures and dynamic links. You could put the source folder even to another partition oder external drive and the link from the reference on the WPS to the source didn't broke. It was like a revelation for me back then.

I still have my OS/2 shrink wrapped that I won at an early '90s COMDEX. I never thought to try it out & just shelved it.

Fun watch! Made me want to revisit OS/2 for sure. I only ran it once getting the discs for the whole thing with a magazine (really desperate for market rate at that point I think...) and after installing it on disc 1 disc 2 had the CD-Rom drivers on it... so that stopped that venture! Great video!

Those sound effects are rather charming actually

awesome presentation sir.

Really interesting overview. Nixes my idea of putting this on an old P2 Thinkpad for DOS retro gaming.

For those familiar with the differences between these CPU generations, that Windows in 1987 targeted the 8088, OS/2 targeted the 286, and Windows NT targeted the 386 pretty much tells you all you need to know about what they can do under the hood and how they accomplish it. The UI is a different story, as this was still back in the era when companies were trying not to get sued by Apple for imitating the "look and feel" of their Finder. At that time, Microsoft was *far* less equipped to ward off a successful lawsuit than was IBM.

Eight megs was the high-end standard for the time. Sixteen megs was "power user" classification that most could not afford.

In the end of 1994 I bought my Intel Pentium 60MHz with 8 MB of RAM and OS/2 WARP pre installed. At this time I thought that this was the next big thing. Microsoft was late with Windows 95, thus IBM had a nice head start. After half a year I was back on DOS and Windows 3.1 because none of my friends had OS/2 and Gaming was impossible .... and eventually I installed Windows 95 in spring of 1996 ...

OS/2 Warp 3 should have taken over what 95 did, it would be like getting XP 10 years earlier, tech quality and features wise.

PC Plus, a British mag, ran a head-to-head user test of OS/2 Warp versus Windows 95. None of the users were IT professionals, or even experienced computer users. From a usability standpoint, Windows wiped the floor with OS/2. The users hated OS/2. As one user put it, "This is a joke! A sick, sick joke!" My takeaway: It doesn't matter how marvelously advanced your product is, if nobody can get to grips with how to use it.

Had a nice device driver layer, real easy to write device drivers for

Pleasant (or not so much) memories of the budding Operating Systems of that period.

The marketing of OS/2 Warp in my opinion was what really hurt it next to Windows 95 marketing. IBM didn't even show off their product, they just told everyone how cool it is. Microsoft pushing Windows 95 showed off their product, and people got excited about it. For the home user why are you going to spend more on an OS you don't even know.

I used to play doom on OS/2 3.0 and 4.0 on a 486DX 2 50. I had added 16MB of RAM to give the PC 20 MB so that was a lot of ram in those days and probably helped.

The floating thing in OS/2 Warp is really a good comparison to Macs also stupidly floating task bar... Never understood that why that would be handy to have something that should always be present to be floating and not fixed to a border. The start menu in NT4 and 95 really did it right.

I was an OS/2 user and it was an excellent operating system. It was technically superior to its competition at the time, and on a fair and even playing field, probably would have dominated. Initially, OS/2 was a joint project, continuing the IBM-MS relationship established with DOS. It was to be, and even touted by MS as, the next generation of the operating system. Windows emerged during this time frame, largely as a GUI placed on top DOS and also a way of introducing GUI concepts to the DOS community that was to be the OS/2 community. Initially, it was an interim step. And the first couple of versions of Windows are largely forgotten and weren't all that usable. Windows 3 was the "shiny apple" that caught the consumers eye. And MS monopolized on that. During this time frame, both MS and IBM were working on versions of OS/2. IBM had version 2, MS had the future version 3. Allegedly, with the success of Win3, MS began putting more resources/employees on that and less on OS/2, while still getting paid by IBM for the OS/2 work. And that is at least part of what led to the lawsuit and split. When the split happened with the lawsuit and the project broke apart, they each took the portion they were working on. IBM completed version 2 and released it. Apparently, it seems at least a portion of the version 3 project may have ended up in NT. MS monopolized on that Win3 popularity, eventually with contracts for OEMs that excluded any other OS being offered. Since Win3 was popular, every OEM needed it as a choice, but MS's contracts insisted it be the only choice. Seems actually competing on merit has never been an MS quality. I can recall hearing from a buyer for a major corporation once telling a story about trying to order OS/2 machines for her workplace. And getting Windows machines instead. Even went as far as threatening to cease business with them if the next order came with Windows and not OS/2. They came with Windows, she looked for another supplier. That's the kind of extortion power MS had over the market back then. Even IBM's own division making PCs wouldn't put OS/2 on them. I ran it for years, through the Warp 3 and Warp 4 lifetimes, anyway. Went from there to linux. One of the things I miss from OS/2 is REXX, a virtually universal scripting language that was extremely easy to use. You could run scripts with it at the command line and applications often included the same language internally as their internal scripting language. There's a linux implementation of REXX (Regina), but I haven't had much luck getting it to work. But, you missed the greatest technological marvel of OS/2, and that's actually in the red spine box you derided. The other versions of OS/2 actually included a recompiled copy of Windows in the box. Recompiled to make it behave as a client under the OS/2 system. That also meant IBM was paying a royalty to MS for each of those copies of Windows. So, they came up with the "for Windows" version, a much debated and disliked name. Because application software often came labelled that way, some thought it implied it needed and for use on Windows. Not the case. At that point in time, it was virtually impossible to buy a computer without Windows installed on it. So, most computers already had a copy of Windows, unless the user had actually scrubbed the system and installed something else. Remember I mentioned that OS/2 had come with a recompiled version of Windows? To make use of that existing copy of Windows likely on your system, and still fix everything they fixed in the recompiled version, they developed a hot patch technique. Load the Windows file into memory, then patch the memory location. Very slick technique that worked very well. Seamless operation with Windows apps. You didn't need to open any of the Windows tools shown here on OS/2, you could just launch the Windows app itself directly. If you had the sounds set, you'd hear the Windows startup sound as the Windows app loads, and the Windows exit sound when you exit the app. The whole Windows subsystem would just load/unload in the background. But, it depended on knowing where in memory to apply the patch. So, when MS made changes that shifted the memory map, it would break that hot patch technique. As I recall, there was a very minor Windows revision released during that time that did little more than shift some help files, etc. but no real bug fixes or anything. But, enough to shift things and break Warp.

Well, it's encouraging that you had a decent experience installing Warp 3 on your Blue Lightning, because I'm about to undertake the task on my own. I'm using an SD to IDE adapter, though, and I did finally swap that Trio64V+ with a CL-GD5428. :P

I loved OS/2 and OS/2 Warp, both were great systems. The nice part was being able to run WordPerfect, print a file, and play music at the same time.

I used OS/2 Warp. I could not believe that I could run a video game like Wing Commander in a windowed mode and do other things at the same time.

I was on the OS2, OS2.2 and WARP Beta's all suffered from similar problems in that they continually lost printers. OS2.2 also didnt fully support Netware until quite late in the game, I remember struggling to load drivers to connect that seemed to load but failed to provide login options. Marketing for Windows was better and OS2 didnt push its strengths, especially the ability to run full 640k windowed DOS apps, with extended memory available. In business, its native support for DB2 and the ability of the database to link to AS400's (ISeries) and IBM Mainframes should have made it a killer.... The tech briefings (held in Birmingham in the UK for the European Beta testers) showed the complexity of the underlying structure. BTW the Beta was delivered as boxes and boxes of 3.5 disks... loads of disk swapping... I installed a few versions for clients but spent hours reconfiguring printers and tweaking as things as the OS showed its shortcomings... It should have been the success that Windows became - it was better, faster, and more capable but somehow bland subdued and lacking the sparkle that Windows had. I was sad to watch its gradual demise.

Used it for couple of months. Was close to PowerPc system. Liked it.

The true multi-tasking ability of OS/2 was key. I used it for an environmental monitoring system in underground mines in the early 90s. Windows at the time used some kind of time-slicing, which was no good when multiple programs needed to run full out at the same time. I think Windows became truly multi-tasking only with W95.

I enjoyed your review. Thank you. I work with a bunch of ex-IBMers. My lead has OS/2 Warp and offered it to me. Maybe I should take her up on her offer? 🤔

Our first version of Lotus Notes only ran on OS/2. I would imagine that both IBM and Lotus Development Corporation thought the code Bill Gates and Microsoft got to keep after building OS/2 for IBM would never amount to much.

OS/2 was far more stable then Windows. You could crash Windows with 2 assembler instructions requiring a reboot. In OS/2 the same instructions would only lock that session and you could close it and continue. OS/2 was truly object oriented. If you moved a program file to a different folder on the hard drive, OS/2 would automatically update the links/icons to the program on the menu and desktop. In Windows still today the links will be broken and the icons won't work anymore. Software support was the biggest issue. You could get versions of Wordperfect and Lotus for OS/2. Also Netscape for internet browsing. But most of these programs were not updated much and lacked features compared to their Windows versions. Also hardware drivers were always an issue for OS/2. All new hardware that came out had support for Windows, but there was little support for OS/2.

Brings back memories :)

Fun Fact: The Windows NT kernel is actually based off of OS/2's kernel.

one of the worst things about OS/2 is that every major version was nearly a complete rewrite. so something that worked on older versions wouldn't work on the newer versions. OS/2 warp 4 is such a headache in every possible way.

Do you know where I Can get the Update disc for os/2 danish version?

Ummm... The "red spine" Warp did have DOS compatibility built in. What it didn't have was built in Windows. You were expected to use the Windows you already had, to install it in OS/2. One other thing, beyond the built in DOS, you could install whatever DOS you wanted and even CP/M-86.

i actually used that(bought it)! i loved it!

At one time in the 1990s I was a contributing writer to OS/2 E-zine, specializing in the networking aspect of it (integration with the then industry standard Novell NetWare). I was an avid OS/2 fan. It had a lot of potential and Warp v. 4 was far superior to Windows 2000. When Warp v. 3 came out its biggest competitor was Windows 95 and even that was a graphical shell that ran on 8-bit DOS, while OS/2 was a true 32-bit OS. The biggest problem was the lack of app support. I feel like IBM thought that DOS and Windows 3.1 backward compatibility was enough but if you want to truly enjoy the OS/2 experience you need 32-bit apps that are made for OS/2. Lotus Notes support was huge in the beginning (and I landed many a job in that sector because of my expertise) but eventually IBM moved Notes to Windows 2000 servers (I died a little when I had to port Campbell's Soup to Win2K). IBM could have had the dominant desktop OS if they had tried but they acted like they just couldn't be arsed.

Long time ago I was an OS/2 user. IIRC it was called "Warp" starting with version 4 only.

Always loved this thing, even got in trouble with my boss over it...he was a microsoft certified solutions provider...LOL

wow worked on this in 94 ...goodness I remember that awful server room back in the day

My local circuit court clerk’s office used OS/2. I was impressed by Big Blue’s attempt to make inroads in the PC market it arguably created for business. I’m not sure what IBM was thinking when it negotiated a license to use MS-DOS. Looking back, I think Big Blue should have had a viable alternative in mind to use for its new Personal Computer. Having that as a bargaining chip, IBM should have found a way to purchase Microsoft, including its MS-DOS asset, outright. What could have been!

OS/2 was a huge business success for IBM. Little know fact, but if you used a cash in the 90's and later, you very likely used OS/2 to get cash from your bank. I got to know an IBM marketing guy somewhere along the line and I lamented on missing OS/2, and found out it was a still a big revenue generator.

OS/2 v.2 had animated wallpaper. Kind kewl.

I still have the 3 disc that came with my IBM PC, Let's installing onto my Presario CDS520 which is like your worlds fastest 386 486-SX2-66 64mb ram 2G HDD

I used it back in the day on servers. It was great.

How strange it is that my OS2 keyboard and mouse always work, even though they are decades old. When the many USB copies of those fail, those old darlings still always work.

When I first got into IT in the early 90's, we ran O/S 2 for servers, file and print/Lotus Notes etc. It ran great. I liked how you could assign a printer to a user profile so no matter where you logged on in the shop, your printer was set up. Ran Win 3.1 for shop floor pc's then Win 95 a bit later. It was a performer.

OS/2 Warp was way ahead of it's time, which is so unfortunate. The company I worked at druing that time ran it for one of the critical applications we have. Ran solid, never had weird errors, and ran fast. It just plain worked. It would have been a different world if vendors would have gotten behind it and written more drivers for hardware, so usage could have expanded. It's one OS I truly miss

I loved os/2. I first had a go ofnit with os/2 warp 3 server trial IBM sent me. Such a shame they didn't try giving it away as a desktop to nail MS

OS/2 suffered from a common problem with a LOT of Enterprise class software: greedy pricing schemes mandated by executives. Yes, software costs money to develop. I get that. That does NOT mean the software needs to cost more. In fact, decent software CAN and WILL make MORE money using LOWER pricing. Software has that initial development cost, but individual unit cost is minimal. Lower pricing means more people can buy it, and even with lower profit per unit, it can mean more overall profit, IF the software is worth adopting. Higher costs per license means fewer people can buy it, and fewer are willing to buy it if there is a cheaper alternative. The cost of OS/2 was WAY too high to lead to adoption. Linux companies get this. Many give away the OS for free, but charge a pretty low cost for access to the updates and a reasonable cost for direct support. Granted, today's environment of always available internet updates and the need for quick turnaround for updates to close security holes does increase the costs behind any software, but this was not an issue way back when OS/2 came out. This was a curse on OS/2 that likely just piled on top of the other issues to sink it. This aspect likely wasn't enough to totally sink it on its own, but I do remain convinced that there were enough advantages to OS/2 that decent marketing and cutting the price to 70% that of Windows would have allowed it to take over. It was a decent OS, and better than DOS and Windows.

I played Doom on OS/2 on a 486 with 4MB Ram and it was fast and stable! Great OS, hard to install

One of the main (initial) problems was that it required very expensive hardware to run, with advantages that only benefitted large corporations. Consumers and small businesses weren't going to buy it, just like they weren't buying Windows NT. That created a very limited market and thus, available software was lacking greatly compared to Windows 3 and 95.

I think if DOD had accepted OS/2 I think it would still be around.

We all do use OS/2 without knowing it. Because Windows NT is, actually, OS/2 3 for i386 (developed by Microsoft, but refused by IBM, because of their promises for AT 286). Microsoft then built around OS/2 core their new buisness-oriented Windows NT - OS/2 with Windows API and UI on top. We all do use it, because Windows 2000, XP, Vista, an modern Windows 7, 8, 10 and 11 are still based on Windows NT.

I've been using OS/2 3.0 and 4.0 between 1995 and somwhere in the 2000's, but I had to abandon it when IBM dropped it and stopped supporting it. For some years I moved to Win2000 and then Xp and Vista... But in 2005 I switched to Ubuntu Linux as my main OS and since then I never stopped using Linux. Like Workbench 1.3 of the Amiga 500 in the eighties I found OS/2 being a marvel of an OS. I coud run without glitches all the soft and games I used at the time. I had a better performance than you as I was running it from first a 486/DX66, then a Pentium 133, with something between 16 and 32 Mo of RAM. It was a fantastic OS and I still have the boxes, diskettes and CDROMs 😅. I still miss it a bit, but now I'm more than happy with my Linux box... An 11 year old pc with a Sandy bridge i5 Clocked at 3.2GHz on a Z55 Gigabyte motherboard, 64Go of RAM, plenty of storage and a not too old Nvidia GTX 1660 graphical card.😁 Nice video Man, you made me remember good old days with OS/2. Thanks ❤!

To this day, I don't know of any OS that has as nice a GUI as OS/2 with it's clear, legible fonts. Still, it really needed IBM hardware to work properly.

I luv OS/2 Wrap back in the old day. Miss it so much. I wish OS/2 did survive to this day and compete with Microsoft Win11 head on.

i am going out on a limb but I never really got OS/2's UI ... it seemed somehow to distance the user from your files. The weird desktop ghost icons ... the invisible windows.... etc .... a simple UI was essential esp. 1992 ....the engine under the uI though was wonderful.

9:48 this is actually the first version of os/2 warp… that has warped text

os/2 was great. better multitasking than windows. less hardware requirements than windows NT. it had in-built REXX support. i also used WordPerfect for os/2 before switching to Lotus Word Pro with it. still have it installed on an old IBM Thinkpad somewhere.

I used it a bit, it was just like pre Apple os10 mac os., I liked it.

I loved OS/2.

I remember that it needed a lot of RAM, which was very expensive at that time... In your video it seems fantastic, but only because you have 32MB of memory... :)

Why did you go for OS/2 Warp 3 when there's OS/2 Warp 4?

The lack of confidence in OS/2 was evident as they released their office suite for Windows before OS/2 version (Lotus suite).

OS/2 WAS better than windows of the same era (both Win 95 and NT)... I was a project engineer who wrote machine control software and developed device drivers (developed drivers for machine vision system frame grabbers) and so dug into the nuts and bolts of OS/2 and Windows... much preferred OS/2 in the mid-90's. However... it was pretty clear even then that OS/2 was a dead end... though it really took a number of years for Microsoft to surpass OS/2 with XP... before that it was better as a desktop OS than anything MS had.

Take a shot every time he says "that being said"