[HN Gopher] The worst-selling Microsoft software product of all ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The worst-selling Microsoft software product of all time: OS/2 for
       the Mach 20
        
       Author : kungfudoi
       Score  : 86 points
       Date   : 2022-12-26 15:53 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (devblogs.microsoft.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (devblogs.microsoft.com)
        
       | johnhattan wrote:
       | Oooh I remember having one of these (with OS/2, no less) back
       | when I had a side-job as the Microsoft support rep for Texas A&M.
       | I was tasked with getting it up and working so I could demo it to
       | the department heads who were looking to upgrade lots of old IBM
       | XT's.
       | 
       | While DOS with Windows 286 worked okay, OS/2 for Mach20 never
       | would get past installation.
       | 
       | I finally told my boss that I was getting nowhere with OS/2. She
       | contacted her boss and later relayed to me that OS/2 for Mach20
       | had been marked as a "non functional product" and would be going
       | away.
       | 
       | The happy ending was that I kept the Mach20 board in my ancient
       | PC and used it for my remaining programming classes. It ran Turbo
       | Pascal and QuickC for DOS quite well.
        
         | folbec wrote:
         | So this makes you a candidate for the ultimate retro-computing
         | challenge :
         | 
         | "1 If you're one of those retro-computing archivists, I guess
         | this poses an extraordinary challenge even greater than
         | possessing a Tandy Video Information System: Can you track down
         | one of the three remaining copies of OS/2 for Mach 20?"
        
           | johnhattan wrote:
           | Coincidentally, I got a job at Tandy right out of college and
           | I got to see the demise of the VIS firsthand.
           | 
           | There was a big warehouse in Fort Worth where un-sellable
           | products ended up, so I definitely could've won that
           | challenge. They had pallet-loads of brand-new VIS machines
           | bundled with all 20-odd games for around $49.
        
         | Damogran6 wrote:
         | I miss those days. I worked in the Compute department for the
         | DOT and we were always getting proof of concept hardware and
         | some of it ended up under my desk.
         | 
         | Boss has a Dec laptop that was _thin_ (Digital Hi Note?)
         | 
         | We had a Dec Alpha running an early version of Windows NT
         | 
         | I had a Dec PC that started out as a 486, then got a Pentium
         | 120 upgrade daughter card. (possibly this one, though that
         | looks like a Mid tower and the one I had was full-sized)
         | http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/43316/Digital-Persona...
         | 
         | Nowadays...your expansion slots are used for your GPU
         | and....well....maybe a better WiFi card?
        
           | robk wrote:
           | We sold quite a bit of those Dec alphas with nt! (Source: I
           | was a qa intern)
        
         | chiph wrote:
         | > "non functional product"
         | 
         | More accounting fun! This time around revenue recognition. It
         | used to be that you had to ship a physical item to a customer
         | in order to recognize the revenue from the sale. So the place I
         | worked at back then would send out first-draft manuals to
         | customers who had ordered the not-quite-done software. When we
         | finished it and it passed testing, we'd send them the actual
         | diskettes and an updated manual.
         | 
         | I never heard of any complaints being lodged, so it must have
         | been a standard industry practice of the time. Or the
         | salespeople had already smoothed the waves with the customers.
        
       | thriftwy wrote:
       | I also remember there was some kind of upgrade from 286 to crappy
       | 486SX. Or was it from 80386? I saw ads of it bundled together
       | with Windows 95 ones.
       | 
       | Meanwhile if you installed Windows 95 on its minimum supported
       | 80386/4M RAM system, you could literally die while waiting for it
       | to boot. I've personally witnessed it once, luckily was very
       | young and had some runway.
       | 
       | And then enjoy horribly distorted greyish 16-color palette.
        
         | marcus0x62 wrote:
         | I (vaguely) remember there being a bunch of these half-baked
         | upgrade solutions, but are you thinking of the Cyrix 386 to 486
         | upgrade?
         | 
         | http://datasheets.chipdb.org/Cyrix/New%20Folder/faq386up.htm
        
         | bitwize wrote:
         | There was Pentium OverDrive which could take you from 486 to
         | Pentium.
        
           | acheron wrote:
           | I had an Overdrive that went from an original Pentium to the
           | Pentium-MMX I think, while also doubling clock speed (75 MHz
           | to 150!).
        
       | trollied wrote:
       | I really liked OS/2 (warp). I often wonder what the computer
       | landscape would look like these days if the likes of Commodore
       | hadn't completely messed up, or Windows never gained traction.
       | 
       | Operating Systems are in a really weird place right now. I find
       | that macOS has regressed somewhat performance-wise (it was very
       | impressive on my first mac, a powerbook), as has windows. I've
       | just switched my PC to Arch, and I think the Linux desktop
       | experience is more or less there these days. The only thing
       | holding me back before was Windows-only games, but the recent
       | Valve sponsored efforts have proved fruitful, and the likes of
       | World Of Warcraft play just great under Proton.
       | 
       | It was very interesting for operating systems in the 1990s, and I
       | think we're looking at another great period in the 2020s.
        
         | wkat4242 wrote:
         | I don't know about the greatness that's coming in the operating
         | system space.
         | 
         | There seems to be a lot of focus on taking control from the
         | consumer and into the hands of the manufacturer, similar to the
         | model used by mobile phones already.
         | 
         | Usually there's ways around it like with Apple's system
         | integrity protection and sealed system volume. But attestation
         | is also becoming an ever bigger thing and I could see apps
         | being blocked on those systems in the future.
        
       | VLM wrote:
       | Page 32 of the linked Infoworld magazine shows an entire 286
       | computer with a faster clock speed retailing for about twice the
       | cost of the Mach 20 board.
       | 
       | It was an interesting era, retail ads for everything from 10 mhz
       | 8086 to 20 mhz 386 in the same issue.
        
       | jkuria wrote:
       | Not Microsoft BOB? :)
        
         | PreInternet01 wrote:
         | Microsoft Bob sold around 58K units, or a whopping 500K% more
         | than the subject of the article. Make of that what you will...
        
       | wpietri wrote:
       | Wow, this reminds me how "stone knives and bearskins" the old
       | days were. "The IBM PC came with five expansion slots, and they
       | were in high demand. You needed one for the hard drive
       | controller, one for the floppy drive controller, one for the
       | video card, one for the printer parallel port, one for the mouse.
       | Oh no, you ran out of slots, and you haven't even gotten to
       | installing a network card or expansion RAM yet!"
       | 
       | Uphill, in the snow, both ways, etc, etc.
        
         | fencepost wrote:
         | I had a 386 AboveBoard IIRC, plus an 8-in-1 for all my I/O
         | needs, HD controller, CGA adapter and of course the all
         | important 2400 v.42bis modem for getting onto bulletin boards.
         | Good times (but not accurate, because no system clock)
        
         | ecpottinger wrote:
         | Worse was Micro-channel PCs from IBM, you could not put a card
         | in a slot unless you had a driver that supported that
         | particular slot. You could have more slots than cards but found
         | where you HAD to put one card would conflict with another card
         | that needed the same slots.
        
           | wpietri wrote:
           | It's amazing we didn't all end up alcoholics, really.
        
       | rainbowzootsuit wrote:
       | Tangentially related: My first use of FreeBSD was setting up a
       | print server to allow an OS/2 computer running the software for a
       | scanning tunneling microscope to output to an Apple LaserWriter.
       | 
       | I also inadvertently made a domain controller mirror with SAMBA
       | when fooling around with that.
        
       | karmakaze wrote:
       | Non-functional product. This brings back memories of repeatedly
       | trying to get NeXTSTEP 3.3 that was in the office to run on x86
       | hardware. With help from others who loaned hardware and help put
       | together a Digital Research PC with a Vesa-LocalBus video card
       | and a SCSI card that worked with various incantations during the
       | boot cycles. After many days and many PC's left apart around the
       | office, it finally ran and it was all worth it to experience what
       | seemed like the future. Interface Builder and the whole NSObject
       | system was incredible.
        
       | PreInternet01 wrote:
       | The expansion boards mentioned (Microsoft Mach, Orchid Turbo) are
       | members of a product category I've ever only seen in ads, _never_
       | in real life. Probably because they only made sense, pricing-
       | wise, for actual-IBM PCs, not for the clones that pretty much
       | everyone was running (often at a much higher clock speeds than
       | the  'real' PC/XT or even PC/AT, which in my neck of the woods
       | was never that popular: the 386SX was the first must-have upgrade
       | due to its insanely higher speed).
       | 
       | That OS/2 for such cards never sold well is not much of a
       | surprise: OS/2 1.x was pretty much pointless anyway, and even the
       | comparably-more-useful Windows 2.x releases were not exactly
       | bestsellers.
       | 
       | I did some OS/2 1.x development on a PS/2 Model 80, a full-height
       | tower that was as expensive as it was heavy. It had a real 80386,
       | VGA, 2MB RAM, plus a whopping 120MB of disk space. The new
       | proprietary MCA bus wouldn't fit any existing expansion cards,
       | and a lot of existing (DOS/Windows) software wasn't available in
       | the new-fangled 3.5" floppy format either.
       | 
       | Switching the thing on was the best part of the experience: the
       | heavy-duty power switch made a _very_ satisfying  'clunk' sound.
       | The duration of the BIOS memory test and the OS/2 boot process
       | were less fun, and software development was downright horrible:
       | despite the US$ 5000 price tag, the OS/2 SDK was extremely
       | limited and slow, and only used the 386 as a slightly faster 286
       | (whereas DOS-based tooling at the time would let you do some
       | _pretty_ interesting things already).
        
         | tom_ wrote:
         | You could get similar products for the non-PC compatible
         | computers that were popular in the UK, especially during the
         | late 80s/early 90s period when PC software was worth having but
         | the hardware was still comparatively expensive.
         | 
         | - Amiga: http://amiga.resource.cx/exp/a2386sx - Atari ST:
         | https://www.atarimagazines.com/startv4n12/pcditto2.html
         | 
         | - Acorn Archimedes:
         | https://chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/32bit_UpgradesA2...
         | 
         | - BBC Micro:
         | https://chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/Master...
         | 
         | I used Amiga and Archimedes PC cards in the 90s - couldn't tell
         | you which ones - and have seen a BBC Master 512 in use. I admit
         | I've never actually seen an ST hardware emulator though.
         | 
         | (I used the software-based pc ditto on an ST in the 90s, which
         | did a decent job of being a IBM XT, albeit one running at about
         | 1 MHz. But I'm sure it would have run very nicely on a Falcon
         | or TT030.)
        
         | karmakaze wrote:
         | Probably after the era of PC/XT upgrades, the 386SLC had the
         | clock speeds and on-die cache that made close to the DX.
         | 
         | I really enjoyed my time developing on OS/2 1.2 and later 1.3
         | with the IBM intern-developed VESA SVGA driver. It was
         | multitasking that really worked. My first PC was a clone 386DX
         | with socketed cache chips, 8MB RAM, and 11 MHz overclocked ISA
         | bus to make the video updates faster.
         | 
         | My next PC was a PS/2 Model 77 running OS/2 (and later Win NT).
         | It was so hard finding an MCA SoundBlaster-compatible card (by
         | Piper Research) so I could play Doom.
        
         | thewebcount wrote:
         | I started home computing in the late 70's to early 80's. Over
         | the years I've found that when I get to the point that I need
         | to upgrade one part of the computer, it's almost never worth
         | it. It's usually time to upgrade the whole thing. When I would
         | replace or upgrade a single part, it would extend me for maybe
         | 6 months before I ran into another piece needing an upgrade.
         | 
         | These days, I tend to buy higher end computers and use them for
         | a long time. For example, I just retired my 2013 Mac Pro this
         | last week. It was running fine, but can't update to the latest
         | OS and some of my critical software needs the latest OS to run,
         | or will shortly. If it weren't for that, I probably would have
         | waited another year or two to upgrade.
        
           | Moto7451 wrote:
           | That 2013 Mac Pro can actually keep on chugging with the
           | latest OS care of OpenCore Legacy Patcher. Thankfully Apple
           | doesn't seem too inclined to force these into e-waste/retro
           | computing.
        
           | FullyFunctional wrote:
           | It took me too long to understand this, but I'll toss in one
           | exception to your rule: storage (short term and long term).
           | I've found that it's frequently useful and economical to
           | upgrade long term storage; eg. the HDs/SSDs until recently
           | were on a price curve such that you were better off
           | postponing buying more until you needed it. And quite a few
           | of my systems have gotten a RAM bump midlife (where prices
           | had come down). Alas, as more as more systems now come with
           | soldered down memory, I usually max it out for longevity.
        
         | classichasclass wrote:
         | Mac CPU upgrades were a big market, though. In the 68K era you
         | had things like Daystar cards and the Radius Rocket, and Apple
         | themselves made a PPC 601 card. Sonnet even made them for
         | allegedly unupgradeable machines, like the 7200 G3 upgrade that
         | took over a PCI slot. The extension shunted everything to the
         | CPU on the card and disabled the 601 soldered to the board.
        
         | skissane wrote:
         | > OS/2 1.x was pretty much pointless anyway
         | 
         | It was the base for LAN Manager, IBM/Microsoft's answer to
         | Netware. Never anywhere near as popular as Netware, but some
         | people used it.
         | 
         | OS/2 1.x Extended Edition also had some mainframe integration
         | bits (Communications Manager). Useful stuff if you needed to
         | talk to an IBM mainframe.
        
       | GnarfGnarf wrote:
       | We once made the mistake of stepping through a program in
       | Microsoft Programmer's Workbench debug mode. Caused a problem
       | which could only be fixed by re-installing OS/2 (26 diskettes).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-12-26 23:01 UTC)