>IBM also refused to bundle OS/2 with their own computers at a lower price point than the ones with Windows bundled.
Not only that, but, IIRC, they charged more for a PC bundled with OS/2. This was a result of all the groups within IBM having been moved toward being run like individual businesses. So, the OS/2 business charged the PC business (whom they treated like any other customer) more than Microsoft charged for a copy of Windows.
Besides being more expensive, Windows 3 apps were (in my memory, at least) every bit as unreliable under OS/2 as they were on Windows (because the compatibility was an almost full Windows runtime), further negating any advantage OS/2 could have.
As you point out, even the version of OS/2 that didn't have the Windows compatibility malware was more expensive than Windows.
It's really hard to believe IBM would be so short sighted, but Microsoft is incredibly lucky in that regard - every company that tried to compete head-on with them, with the possible exception of Apple, made similar boneheaded moves.
Not only that, but, IIRC, they charged more for a PC bundled with OS/2. This was a result of all the groups within IBM having been moved toward being run like individual businesses. So, the OS/2 business charged the PC business (whom they treated like any other customer) more than Microsoft charged for a copy of Windows.
At least that's what I heard at the time.