In the early to mid-90s I was an OS/2 user and supporter. The operating system was originally jointly developed by both Microsoft and IBM. Both companies claimed it was the future, including public statements from Bill Gates. So major business application developers (Lotus, Wordperfect, etc) spent millions making programs for OS/2 version 3 (first version with GUI) and ignoring the "dead-end" Windows. Well, there was a conspicuous hold-out -- Microsoft. As far as I know, they never spent a dime developing 32-bit OS/2 versions of its application programs. IMO, they were planning a double-cross of all its competitors, and it worked outstandingly.
But that's just introduction to my question. Are there IBM insiders that have gone on the record to explain in the face of this betrayal, why IBM folded? One week before the release of Windows 95, IBM announced that OS/2 would not compete with Windows. To me, that was worse than what Microsoft did. Shortly thereafter, the IBM software division in Florida was shut down.
From an outsider's perspective (mine anyway), it can only be explained by a civil war within IBM between its American hardware and software groups. I can't find a link, but around 1994 IBM ran double page ads in the major computer magazines imploring portable customers to "Demand OS/2 on your next portable." I did just that, calling the IBM store and tried to order an IBM Thinkpad with OS/2 pre-installed. They would not do it. I did try insisting, and referred her to the current ads. She said something like, "Yes, we wish they wouldn't have done that." BTW this was long before Lenovo bought the rights to Thinkpad and other IBM computers.
What was particularly vexing to me about all this is that OS/2 Warp was clearly superior to Windows, not to mention IBM's decade-long claim that this was their future in the business and home market.