Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 ... Last
[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 13:30:12 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Yes.

Somewhere.

I hope.

It's a pity that operating system didn't do as well in the marketplace. I liked it very well as a superior operating system to Windows.

[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 14:03:50 EDT from Thanatos @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

You can still find OS/2 running as ATM machines at some banks.

[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 14:06:15 EDT from Nite*Star @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

My very first ThinkPad, the 701CS (butterfly -- what a beaut that was!), came with OS/2 installed. I used it almost exclusively, even to run Windoze (at the time 3.11) programs.

Especially the 3.11 programs that came pre-loaded onto the 701CS.

[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 14:42:42 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I really think you ought to give OS/2 more credit than simply "superior to Windows." That's not saying much at all.

[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 14:44:36 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I know. I realize that.

But it's hard to provide much by way of comparisons.

BeOS, in my opinion, was better.. but it was also more modern.

And, for all the good of OS/2, its IO queue sucked.

[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 16:14:06 EDT from Mr.T @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

BeOS was The Shit.

[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 16:29:41 EDT from Animal @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

*agreed*

[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 16:36:05 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

And, for all the good of OS/2, its IO queue sucked.

DO

DOST THOU MOCK MY HONOR!??!?!? EXPLAIN YOURSELF.
it's been a long time, but I was tryig to remember ANYTHING I found wrong with os/2 and couldn'trmember anything.

[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 16:36:43 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I don't know anything abut beos, wish
I did, so I could compare and maybe even like it but alas, linux won out anyway so it doesn't matter.
linux is good enough.
for now.

[#] Wed Oct 20 2004 16:37:04 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

What about the message queue? Wasn't there a big debacle where IBM wanted multiple queues, but Microsoft wanted a single queue, and Microsoft got their way? Then they realized it sucked and did multiple queues in Windows NT?

[#] Thu Oct 21 2004 09:14:56 EDT from Freakdog @ Dog Pound BBS II

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That was it...the single input queue was the bane of OS/2's existence. I thought they finally fixed it, right before the end, but I could be wrong.

[#] Thu Oct 21 2004 05:41:00 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


None-the-less, there you have it. That single queue would cause terrible, meaningless hangs on OS/2.

It would figure that Microsoft asked for it.

Don't get me wrong, I liked OS/2 quite a bit. That's my single worst complaint about it.

[#] Thu Oct 21 2004 08:34:06 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Ford was trying to remember something that sucked about OS/2, so there's the example.

[#] Thu Oct 21 2004 09:29:01 EDT from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I think Windows stole much of the credit OS/2 deserved. When microshit
switched their UI from the craptastic Win 3.1 style to Win95 style, they
were lauded as being "revolutionaries." In reality all they did was steal
an interface IBM had been using already in OS/2, right down to the tiny
icons in the corner of the window.

But it all came down to marketing. IBM didn't give a shit about marketing
it's own product. The PC Company division refused to even install OS/2 on
their machines. The marketroids (as usual) had been sold on the gospel of
windows.

Pity.

[#] Thu Oct 21 2004 11:51:31 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Oh, man...

To give an idea of the marketing disaster that is OS/2, consider this huge ad posted in New York City.

It showed an older man with this very sad, depressed look on his face (a fairly close shot). The lettering beside him said something like:

"OS/2 Warp obliterated everything on my hard drive."

Now, I understand where IBM was trying to go with the ad (it obliterated the competition on the hard drive, not the files and data that the user needs.. that's where they were going with the ad), but it had to have been the *stupidest* approach ever. I wonder, sometimes, they had hired someone taking money from Microsoft or something.

[#] Sun Oct 24 2004 23:11:01 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Oct 20 2004 4:37pm from IGnatius T Foobar @uncnsrd
What about the message queue? Wasn't there a big debacle where IBM
wanted multiple queues, but Microsoft wanted a single queue, and
Microsoft got their way? Then they realized it sucked and did multiple

queues in Windows NT?


Oh yeah, I didn't know there was a fight about it but yea, vaguely rings a bell, but yea, there was only one message queue, and it sucked, I forgot about that. that was a big flaw.
I wonder what else I'm forgetting.

[#] Sun Oct 24 2004 23:14:34 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

you remember the Search Manager thing?
IBM designed and built what amounts to google for your hard drive and called it search manager, and completely failed tomarket it AT ALL.
So Os/2 magazine found out about it and made an ad for it out of their own pockets (and said this was an example of what they think IBM should do to market search manager)
and sales of SM picked up the next day thousandfold or something likethat.

But, yea, everybody knows os/2 was the universal example of stealth marketing.

oh well, it was fun while it lasteed.
Oh and another flaw in os/2: no multiuser, that was kind of a big oversight considering where the world was going, even back then, unless they were trying to not eat their MF business...

[#] Mon Oct 25 2004 20:42:46 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Nobody in the non-Unix world was thinking about multiuser GUI until a few years later. Then the folks at Citrix built their system (which originally ran on OS/2) and suddenly everyone had to "invent" what Unix had already been doing for 10-15 years...

[#] Mon Oct 25 2004 20:44:28 EDT from Mr.T @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Meanwhile, unix and app servers are re-inventing stuff that's been on
mainframes for years before...

[#] Mon Oct 25 2004 20:48:39 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Kudos to IBM for cannibalizing their own mainframe business before someone else does. Bringing high-end enterprise features to Linux is helping them score some sweet deals.

Go to page: First ... 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 ... Last