From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: OS/2 is the best?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 15:46:20 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.145201.22840@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca> hwhalen@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Hugh Whalen) writes:
>In article <C0EutC.J8w@news.cso.uiuc.edu> fippen@ux2.cso.uiuc.edu (J. Fippen) writes:
>>	I see all the time information about Windows,Windows, Windows.Does this
>>make sense in an os2 category?
>>	The people who use Windows are those not interested in the best. They
>>want something easy. Fine. They should have Windows. But for people who want
>      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Now, this is new. A lot of the bitching about Windows in this group is 
>about how hard it is ..... system.ini, win.ini, config.sys, memory 
>managers, etc.


	My sister and parents, all utter illiterates (i,e., they can't
	chance *directories* in DOS), can run Windows and install new
	programs just fine.  (It helps that I have a big sign next
	to their machines that say "INSTALL PROGRAMS TO DRIVE D."
	"IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, TYPE MAKEDOS AT DOS PROMPT TO RESTORE
	DOS"  [just replaces the config and autoexec]).


>>something a lot better, at least 100 times more powerful, well, they would
>>be satisfied with nothing less than os2.
>>	Windows is kind of for the slow types, the satisfied types, the people
>>who won't put forth the effort to run os2. The people who run hard will want
>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>This is also new. OS/2 is harder to run than Windows .... hmmmm.         


	Or the people who *can't* run OS/2.  People talk about NTs
	hardware requirements and how steep they are.  They're forgetting
	that anything over 4megs/100megs looks pretty darn steep to
	people running Windows.


>>os2 because it is the best, and because it is the program of the future.


	"program of the future"  What a load.  OS/2 is the program
	of now.  If I am still forced to be running it 5 years from
	now, I will be sick.  My Amiga 1000 used to multitask with more
	smoothness and power than OS/2 does on a machine that is 
	orders of magnitude more powerful with more than 16 times
	the amount of memory.  


>Excel, PowerPoint, and TrueType fonts and using OLE to connect various 
>things together. Since OS/2 does not yet support TrueType or enhanced 
>mode (necessary to run PowerPoint) I cannot switch to OS/2 without 



	In fairness to IBM, both are now included in WINOS@31.  Emode
	is a new addition, while tt has been there for awhile.  I'm
	rather disappointed that IBM has stepped back from it's promise
	to include TT support in OS/2 in addition to ATM, but.. 


	Anyone know if an OS/2 version of SuperATM is in the works?


>redoing a lot of work.  I also have an ATI card and I believe that 
>seemless OS/2 drivers are not available for this card. When and if 


	IMHO, "seamless windows" was a big mistake.  I have yet to
	see it run with any speed, even when it works.  Rather than
	making such a big deal over it, IBM should have done it
	stealthly--that is, when they had the hardware that could do it
	without slowing the machine down to nil, they could advertise that
	hardware as *adding* a feature to OS/2 and not have to field
	all of these "why don't my windows programs run seamless when
	it's advertised on the box, dammit?" questions.

	This would have made a good push for XGA2, too.  "Includes
	NEW! seamless windows support for OS/2!"

-- 
      Blaming "society" for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.
 ---  boycott == coercion == censorship == closed mindedness == cowardice  ---
	      "Psalms 23:1  The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want."  
		Shepherds are for sheep.   -----      Pain teaches.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy