From: jsmolnar@descartes.waterloo.edu
Subject: Re: NoS/2 shipping yet?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 04:39:24 GMT

>Nothing was left out.  It has all the features that it was supposed to
>ship with, and will have even more features when 2.1 comes out, such
>as SVGA support, etc.  Heck, it even does the things that Microshaft
>weenies said could never be done, like run seamless windows.  Oh well,
>what do you expect from a company that thinks Visual Basic is the
>macro language of the future #8-)

Well, hate to tell you this, but 32 bit Pm is not included, not all of seamlessswindows is included (ie SVGA, this is a fact), and other things, so becareful, you don't seem to know exactly what you are getting.  They are giving you a product they said would be complete, but it is not.

On the other hand, Windows 3.1 is complete, and not a minor upgrade, it is not called 4.0 because MS already knows what it wants in 4.0 (and announced it basically).  So I think I will take the product I know is complete and doesn't require another few disks of upgrading in June...>

>   - Drag and Drop for programs.  You drop a data file on a program,
>     and the program runs on that data file.  OS/2 has it.

Well, sorry, but 3.0 did have a drag and drop style FM.
>
>   - A built in font manager for scalable fonts.  OS/2 has had Adobe
>     Type Manager integrated into the operating system for years.  

Sorry, ATM has not been shipping with it for years, for I own it and know this for a fact.

>     Oh, right, Microsoft didn't like it that there were so many
>     freely available ATM fonts out there, so they decided to go to a
>     proprietary font technology that has very little in the way of
>     free fonts available, and provides little in improved performance
>     Oh well, I guess you have to expect that. I'll stick with ATM
>     thank you very much.

Well, MS did this because it wanted to create an open system for font technology that works cross platform (ie Mac).  Besides this technology has been proven better than ATM (so you can stick with it if you feel).

>Of course, MS-Windoze does add a lot of other features in 3.1:
>
>- It has "Ole".  Neat.  Who cares?  Do any PROGRAMS use it?  The same
>  features are available in OS/2, under a different name.  Nothing new here.

First of all yes, a good few industry standard programs come available with it.
And hate to tell you this, but you don't know what the hell you are talking about (as if this wasn't evident before).  Nothing even close to OLE is available under OS/2.  And OLE is quite useful for interapp communication.  I use it a lot.
>
>OS/2 2.0 comes with DOS 5.0 and Windows.  Windows comes with a disclaimer.  
>Any questions?     - juan@noyles.pha.pa.us (Juan Jose T. Noyles)

Ya, then why does OS/2 come with a disclaimer as well.

Please, if you want to compare the two, do it with constructive criticism or stay on a Os/2 area.  I agree that technically os/2 is better because of the 32 bit support, and multi-threading (though 32 bit support is available under windows 3.0 and 3.1 .. more so in the later), but for the user, Windows is a hell of a lot better and will therefore fare better.  OLE, MM Extensions, TT fonts, faster, better FM etc (and cleaner desktop than os/2 2.0) all lead to a nicer system to work with.  

But I guess your mom taught you little, if you don't have anything nice to say, than don't say anything at all ... be constructive and know your facts before you speak...  I use both systems, and know what I am talking about.