In a message to Rachel Veraa, Jack Stein wrote:

 RV> As you know perfectly well, IBM *couldn't* let it happen. 
 RV> Microsoft threatened to withhold licenses from OEMs that
 RV> preloaded or bundled OS/2, threatened to withhold
 RV> development tools from software producers who ported to
 RV> OS/2, and threatened to cut off IBM altogether if they
 RV> continued to press OS/2 -- and they increased IBM's price
 RV> for Windows %500 just to show they meant business.  Big Blue
 RV> would've been out of the PC business altogether in six
 RV> months. 

JS> I doubt that Rachel.  IBM was the second largest distributor of
JS> software at the time, far ahead of MS.

MS had 80% of the PC OS market share.

JS> MS needed IBM to support their products.

Huh?  IBM needed Windows if they hoped to sell enough PCs to make it
worthwhile.  Even if they pushed OS/2 with all they had, they'd never make it
in the consumer market -- and big business and Team OS/2 cognoscenti could
never support the PC division by themselves.

JS> Someone here correctly said that IBM could have
JS> purchased MS OS's at street prices and still supported any customers
JS> that wanted that product,

They maybe coulde bought them, but they certainly couldn't preload or bundle
them without a _license_ from MS -- which could have any terms MS wanted.

JS> they already charge an arm and a leg for
JS> their support, the cost of the OS is almost meaningless in these
JS> charges.  Also, the practices MS was threatening with were not very
JS> supportive of the Sherman Anti Trust laws, and IBM is/was painfully

When did that ever stop Mocrosoft?  The fact is that they _did_ do those
practices, and they _did_ get away with it.


       Cheers,
           Rachel

http://www.netside.net/~rveraa/
114/441