A lot of people had one.
Name some others that IBM contacted, then.
IBM had a previous relationship with Gates, buying his language product, so they asked him who they should use for their new OS. Gates suggested Kildall's CP/M, Kildall wasn't home...
Nah. Not true. Read the Kildall
wiki.
"In 1980, IBM approached Digital Research for a version of CP/M for its upcoming IBM PC. Legend has it that Kildall snubbed the IBM representatives by going flying in his Pitts Special (an aerobatic biplane) for several hours. Although widespread, the story is generally not accepted to be true because it was Kildall's wife, Dorothy, who handled business negotiations, not Kildall himself. Another story has it that IBM representatives wanted Dorothy to sign their standard non-disclosure agreement, which Dorothy considered overly burdensome. Kildall associate Gordon Eubanks has said that the non-disclosure was signed, but that Kildall was not enthusiastic about porting CP/M to the IBM PC's 8088 processor."
In that era, NO ONE negotiated with IBM from a position of power. It would be like a small software maker negotiating with Microsoft today from a position of power.
Anyone who has a commodity that you need and can't obtain elsewhere is negotiating from a position of power. I'm surprised that you can't admit this simple truth. But, I suppose, it flies in the face of your argument that Gates & Co. only attained their success through blind luck. I believe that most people reading this thread will agree with me that you're full of crap, though. Clearly, Gates realized that a non-exclusive agreement was an important thing and, clearly, IBM's attorneys were smart enough to understand that the agreement allowed Gates to sell his OS to other parties. You can argue that, but it's just not credible.
Nope, faster on the SAME hardware. You could boot directly into OS 9 or use OS 9 under OS X on the same machine. Using it under OS X was faster.
Let's see the data.
I'll start with one: uptime. As for OS X, just use it. It's brain-dead easy to administer the server and network. Nobody does usability like Apple.
Let's see the data.
Or for the military, which has quite a few, including in a supercomputer cluster. And what's this "platic furniture" thing about?
So what. The military spends $800 on ashtrays. They're good at blowing things up, but these guys aren't known for their intelligence.
Name some others that IBM contacted, then. They contacted only those two. Bill said he could get them an OS, and he did. IBM could have just as easily bought QDOS themselves if they'd been bothered to look around, but they didn't think the OS was important.
Anyone who has a commodity that you need and can't obtain elsewhere is negotiating from a position of power. I'm surprised that you can't admit this simple truth.
The commodity was obtainable from other sources, so that point is moot.
Let's see the data.
I had a link with some informal benchmarks, but I can't find it now. As you may know, OS 9's virtual memory management was absolutely horrible. Classic mode (OS 9 under OS X) disables OS 9's virtual memory management and makes OS 9 see essentially unlimited physical memory, which unknown to OS 9 will be a combination of physical memory and OS X's highly efficient virtual memory system. Thus, any applications in situations that would normally cause OS 9 to use virutal memory will have higher performance under Classic than under straight OS 9.
OS X usability has to be experienced.
They're good at blowing things up, but these guys aren't known for their intelligence.
Shall I give your address to my Special Forces friends, especially the one who also happens to be an excellent DBA?