Editing Workplace OS (section)

===Academic analysis===
In September 1997, a case study of the history of the development of Workplace OS was published by the [[University of California]] with key details having been verified by IBM personnel. These researchers concluded that IBM had relied throughout the project's history upon multiple false assumptions and overly grandiose ambitions, and had failed to apprehend the inherent difficulty of implementing a kernel with multiple personalities. IBM considered the system mainly as its constituent components and not as a whole, in terms of system performance, system design, and corporate personnel organization.<ref name="WorkplaceMicrokernelandOS"/>{{rp|22}} IBM had not properly researched and proven the concept of generalizing all these operating system personalities before starting the project, or at any responsible timeframe during it — especially its own flagship AIX.<ref name="WorkplaceMicrokernelandOS"/>{{rp|21}} IBM assumed that all the resultant performance issues would be mitigated by eventual deployment upon PowerPC hardware.<ref name="WorkplaceMicrokernelandOS"/>{{rp|22}} The Workplace OS product suffered the [[second-system effect]], including [[feature creep]], with thousands of global contributing engineers across many disparate business units nationwide.<ref name="WorkplaceMicrokernelandOS"/>{{rp|21}} The Workplace OS project had spent four years and $2 billion (or 0.6% of IBM's revenue for that period), which the report described  as "one of the most significant operating systems software investments of all time" and "one of the largest operating system failures in modern times".<ref name="WorkplaceMicrokernelandOS"/>{{rp|22}}