Development, round II (OS/2)

From: Mike Allison <mallison_at_konnections.com>
Date: Sun Feb 1 20:32:21 1998

I think one of the biggest OS/2 problems was that the DOS and Windows
boxes weren't 100% compatible at all times and management was an issue
between OS/2 and winders.

OS/2 Warp had one of the best Internet systems I've used. Seemed very
fast for the 14.4Kbps modem I was using at the time.

There is still much sharware and freeware out there, as well as some
programs (many high end supporting OS/2 - mainframe connectivity)

-Mike

Hotze wrote:
>
> >BTW What is Warp? Is it the OS/2 windowing system? If so, why would I
> >want to use it at all, let alone on a 286? ;-)
> Yes, it is. Actually, if I remember, it came out in 1994, but it could have
> been early 1995, but definately PRE WINDOWS '95! You might want to use it
> for several reasons: If you've got software for it. There's WordPerfect for
> Warp, Netscape Navigator for Warp, amongst others. Actually, if you ask me,
> Warp's more of a competitor to NT than '95, as it's definately not
> consumer-oriented. It features a *nice* plug and play system. Actually,
> the interface on the older Warp's looks AMAZINGLY like Windows '95, which
> makes me wonder if it was copied, and who copied who.
> Theoretically, IBM's designing a completely new version of OS/2 Warp,
> called 'Bluebird' or something. This is a guess, but it's probably going to
> be NT as well as '95 compatible, plus rock-solid stability, much better than
> NT.
> The reason that we're using Windows as opposed to OS/2 is (in my
> opinion) because IBM did two things: With Windows 3.0 and 3.1, they waited
> until AFTER the MS release, and made it Windows compatible. They had
> relatively high success, but they weren't happy with it. So, with the 32
> bit version, they released BEFORE Windows, but ruined all their success.
> The advantage is that if you want to run Windows 3.x apps with the current
> version of OS/2, you get 32 bit performance, compatiblity, and many of the
> features of a "next-generation" operating system.
> It's a good alternitive for people who want a Windows look and feel, but
> without the "Microsoft" beofore the name.
> I could be wrong on most/all of this, so please feel free to correct me.
> Hope that his helps,
>
> Tim D. Hotze
Received on Sun Feb 01 1998 - 20:32:21 GMT