* Rex Ballard fired off this tart reply:
> On Dec 8, 4:00 pm, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Should IBM's OS/2 Be Open-Sourced?
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | A group of die-hard OS/2 users are petitioning IBM--again--to release the
>> | operating system's source code as open-source. The question may not be
>> | whether IBM wants to do so... but if it can. Not, I expect, that IBM will
>> | actually say this out loud.
>> `----
>>
>> http://advice.cio.com/esther_schindler/should_ibms_os_2_be_open_sourced
>
> Remember, OS/2 was originally developed jointly by IBM and Microsoft.
> When IBM did an audit of the Microsoft billing and code, they
> discovered that Microsoft had embezzled a substantial amount of
> resources, as well as a substantial amount of code from OS/2 into
> Windows, including Windows 3.1 and Windows NT. It was eventually
> discovered that Bill Gates personally authorized the embezzlement.
>
> Microsoft eventually settled. They gave IBM all of the source code to
> OS/2, along with a huge wad of cash, and the right to include Windows
> 3.1 functionality into OS/2. Microsoft also promised to deliver the
> 32 bit code version of OS/2.
Sounds like the DEC/Cutler/VMS debacle.
> Microsoft delivered an abomination of
> massively defective code in late 1991. It took IBM nearly 6 months to
> get it functional enough to release, and even then, a TRAP 0E or TRAP
> 0D (illegal instruction) would corrupt the system so badly that the
> entire system had to be reloaded.
C'mon, they would have found that one fairly quickly, hmm?
--
Tux rox!
|
|
