OS/2 Warp 4 in action

OS/2 Warp 4 was released in 1996 , this version was to be the last version to be marketed under the OS/2 brand. Later version were to be named as eComStation and marketed by Serenity Systems. IBM from 2000 and onwards grew interested in Linux and decided to further promote Linux. Today this version is still used in ATM, where

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• PS/2
• OS/2
• IBM
• Mac
• Apple
• Macintosh
• Microsoft
• Windows
• PC
• DOS
• MS-DOS
• PC-DOS
• x86
• OS/2 Warp 4

[StrangeAttr]

I always loved windows 3.11 style icons.

[nextstep333]

@StrangeAttr Susan Kare designed both the icons on the Mac OS and Windows 3.x

[MrRafaelblock]

WaMu used OS/2 in their ATMs as well as teller windows, then switched to NT quickly followed by meltdown resulting in takeover by Chase...coincidence?

[nextstep333]

@MrRafaelblock I believe Chase still uses OS/2 in some of their computers. Remember Windows XP and above cannot run OS/2 16-bit or OS/2 32-bit programs. Bank of America uses OS/2 in some ABMs.

The Bank of Montreal uses OS/2 still.

[nextstep333]

@mercede75 Rexx programming languages and the simple fact that the Workplace interface on OS/2 is object-oriented. Windows 7 still lacks certain features from OS/2 like working with existing objects.

[mercede75]

@nextstep333 Wat libraries make OS/2 better than Windows 7?

[DSMeTailer]

Skip to 1:10 unless you like looking at nothing.

[nextstep333]

@bockebg Windows NT was a rewrite of what would be OS/2 3.x, Windows and Windows NT had different sets of API, Microsoft just created Windows NT so that IBM would be left no third-party support, Microsoft was a key player in OS/2's development. After all Microsoft developed HPFS, DDE, Presentation Manager, and its networking tools. IBM was sort of being a douche because they wanted OS/2 to be run on its 80286 based PS/2, a big Mistake on their behalf.

[bockebg]

But you're correct that OS/2 was somewhat more advanced than consumer (non-enterprise) offer from Microsoft. ;) Win9x just HAD to be perfectly compatible with DOS and Win 3.x... That made it unstable. OS/2 didn't have that burden. It does include some compatibility, but not on same level as 9x.

[bockebg]

@nextstep333: partially true. You forget there were two branches of Windows development. "Windows" and "Windows NT". Windows NT was (and still is) a full fledged operating system that was not based on DOS. Actually, OS/2 was at first developed by Microsoft for IBM. NT took some of these ideas, combined with some ideas from OpenVMS, and voila. Actually NT 3.1 had OS/2 compatibility subsystem (I think it also had POSIX compatibility layer, which later became Interix) . It was later thrown out.