From: gutz@cp947.crl.aecl.ca
Subject: Re: Why OS/2
Organization: AECL-Research
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 12:56:18 GMT

In  <1993Jan19.223152.5966@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu>  larry@tsd.arlut.utexas.edu (Larry Maturo) writes:
>  
>     I started following this group to understand why I should consider switching
> from Windows 3.1 + DOS to OS/2.  So far I've seen a lot of Microsoft bashing and
> Windows NT bashing but little advocacy for OS/2.  What are it's strengths?

Something strange has been happening to me since I switched to OS/2.  I obtained my 2.0 GA last April
and for the first 4-6 months, it was a toy, which I tinkered with at Lunch and outside of business hours,
much like I tinkered with Windows 3.0 when I first got it. (I love toys!).
However, a change slowly took place in the last little while - it happened without me even being
aware of it.  I slowly began to play less with OS/2 and began to use it more during business hours.
Now I can compile using a DOS app, and while I wait I can go off and read my email or news, or even
sneak in a quick game of reversi.

It wasn't until I was using someone elses' system with Windows that I realized how dependent I have
become on OS/2.  When your printing a long document from a Windows app, you can't even switch
to another task to do something else.  Isn't this rather limiting for a so-called "multitasker"?!?

I now use OS/2 an a full-time basis, and with 2.1b, even when I am forced to use a Windows app, it runs
very smoothly, all the while keeping all of the other apps I am using running great!  I notice more and
more of my fellow worker drooling over what I can do with OS/2. Some have switched, and more
will undoubtedly switch soon - once others have blazed a trail for them.

I'm not trying to bash Microsoft, but anyone who is still using Windows is crazy.  I'll admit that OS/2 2.0
was a power users' system, but 2.1 offers much more to the proverbial "typical" user.  I does take
a couple of days to get used to the "OS/2 way" but once you do, you'll never look back.

> Also, is IBM going to drop OS/2 when "pink" is available or is "pink" an OS/2

You will likely see Pinkas a superset of OS/2 (and the Mac too).  IBM never has and never will strand
users on a platform.

> extension?  Also, are there any real user differences between Windows 3.1,
> Windows NT, and OS/2 or are the differences in programming ease?  If it's only
> programming ease then it's simply a matter of using the one with the
> applications available that you need.

I've written apps for Windows and OS/2 and APIs have their strengths and weaknesses.  OS/2 is for
the most part a superset of Windows so program development is similar.  OS/2 offers thread capability
so that is an obvious learning experience.  NT (Win32) are again supersets of Windows so they would
be no more difficult to master than OS/2.

>  
>  
> +-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------+
> |                                   |                                        |
> | Larry Maturo                      | Opinions expressed herein must be      |
> | Tactical Simulation Division      | yours, neither I nor my employer have  |
> | Applied Research Laboratories     | any.                                   |
> | University of Texas at Austin     |                                        |
> | P.O. Box 8029                     +----------------------------------------+
> | Austin, Texas 78713-8029          |                                        |
> |                                   | When you're as great as I am it's hard |
> | larry@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu  | to be modest, but I succeed where      |
> |                                   | others fail.                           |
> +-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------+
Steven Gutz
AECL Research Company
Chalk River Ontario
CANADA

"Change" is the only constant in any experiment.

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy