🚀 go-pugleaf

: : I belive that IBM has the right: they were involved in the original 
: : Windows, and have some rights to the code. (Hence win31 support in os/2)
: : I may be wrong, but I belive that they still have some rights to the 
: : code, they just decided not to support win95. Why? Who knows. However, it 
: : may have something to do with the fact that big blue took over lotus :)

Wrong!

: IBM has the complete right to use the Win API until the end of the time.
: Their rights to the Windows source code expired in Sept. of 92? (maybe 93,
: I forget).  If IBM wanted to clone the Win32 API, they could.  In fact,
: the Developers Extensions for OS/2 is actually just a bunch of the most
: commonly used APIs from Win32 made native to OS/2, making porting simpler.
: They could do the whole set if they wanted to, but they want native OS/2
: software, not an OS that people use to run Windows (as is too often
: the case now).

You better check up on your facts son. IBM does not have any legal rights 
what so ever to to WIN32 API's or Win 95. That little fact spells 
deathbells for OS/2. OS/2 sales only picked up once they incorporated 
Windows into the program and that's a fact. Imagine all the wonderful new 
software coming out for Win95 and OS/2 will be left floating in use to be 
Win 3.1 land.We keep hearing about all this port over nonsense, the only 
problem is all the companies seem not interested in doing so! They can only 
clone Win 31 and down which explains why they've been trying unsuccessfully 
to reverse engineer Win32 API for some time now. You people ought to try 
reality for a change.