I am talking about 2.0 which was the IBM product mentioned in the post. 1.0 was still a joint product with Microsoft prior to the split.
https://winworldpc.com/product/os-2-1x/10
No, I get your point, and in that position I'd have wished I kept a set, too, but it was not lost to history.
FWIW a beta of Microsoft OS/2 2.0 was found earlier this year and I wrote about it.
https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/11/trying_ms_prerelease_...
Yes, Microsoft 32-bit OS/2 two, not a typo.
My point is, Letwin was wrong: it was not the apps that sank OS/2.
The 16-bit version killed its changes, and that did have some big-name native apps.
And it didn't need 8MB -- although it would not have objected.