From: Bill Morrow (penzance_at_gate.net)
Date: Sun Jul 30 2000 - 21:24:18 EDT
Speaking of OS Wars (???)..
a few observations.. :-)
i like windoze because its pretty standard, i would like to have a version of
OS/2 but it only exists at banks and other large commercial sites these days..
Linux is nice but still a long way from the convienence of Windoze..
NOW, a small alarm for the NT users out there who might put an NTFS HDD in as a
second HDD with a w2k OS running the show..
DON'T..!!
apparently, W2k will redo the NTFS on the NT HDD to the w2k version of NTFS and
Viola!! some apps on the NT HDD won't work..!
OK, if you guys want to have a battle, i'll make a seperate topic on my
thinkpads.com open forum..
you can swear and fulminate as much as anyonw wants.. i'll not interfere.. :-))
Mike Capone wrote:
> Who cares? this crap is off topic! Take it off the
> reflector. This has nothing to do with installing OS/2 on
> a thinkpad, so what is it doing on here? It's worsening
> the signal/noise ratio. Theres enough posts on here to look
> at without having to deal with braindead "os jock" retards
> that get stuck in the endless loop battle of battling over which
> OS is better? Who really gives a flying f*ck? People are going
> to use whatever OS they want, irregardless of anyones opinion...
> Wether its windows or OS/2 or BSD or DOS, etc, etc, ad nauseum. You
> people must realize that these "battles" are fruitless and
> result in ABSOLUTELY NOTHING being accomplished.
>
> The bottom line is this "war" has ALMOST NOTHING to do with
> IBM thinkpads.
>
> If you want to waste time arguing about operating systems, then take
> it to private email, or an advocacy group on usenet, or another place
> built for the purpose.
>
> -Mike
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Poltorak [mailto:jp_at_eyup.org]
> > Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2000 8:19 PM
> > To: thinkpad_at_cs.utk.edu
> > Subject: Re: OS Wars again...
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 04:39:00PM -0400, STeve Andre' wrote:
> > > Sigh.
> > >
> > > I've researched this, which is how I came to my conclusions.
> > >
> > > I've also talked to IBM. You might want to do the same.
> >
> > IBM is not one person.
> >
> > It is a huge company. It has a huge turnover - greater than most of
> > the countries in the world. There are very few people within IBM who
> > understand, let alone speak for IBM.
> >
> > > Look, I'm really sorry that OS/2 is dead--I truly am.
> >
> > In the last two days I have been installed FixPak 14 for OS/2 Warp 4,
> > tried out the latest test version of the Mozilla (the next version of
> > Netscape) for OS/2, tested a new release of Odin - a Win32 converter
> > for OS/2 and checked out another release of some tools being released
> > for producing a Posix subsytem for OS/2 (Posix/2). With these tools
> > you can take source code written for *BSD and it will compile as a
> > native OS/2 app. This means that before too long OS/2 will provide
> > a platform for not only running OS/2 apps, but also Win32 and Unix
> > apps, without any requirement for anyone to port those apps to OS/2.
> >
> > Just to remind you, Warp 4 came out almost four years ago, and it
> > included a Voice Navigation subsystem. Now Bill Gates is trying to
> > sell the 'innovative' idea of voice control as a feature of a future
> > version of Windows.
> >
> > Maybe someone who is familiar with Windows can tell me how many different
> > versions of Windows they will have to buy before IBM stops
> > producing *free*
> > Fixpaks for Warp4 ?
> >
> > > The reason why IBM is
> > > working on things at the moment is that they are *obligated* to do this.
> >
> > IBM has some large commercial organisations using OS/2. You may have
> > heard of HSBC - the worlds largest bank. They want support for OS/2 for
> > at least another six years.
> >
> > > When
> > > their contract with the government runs out, you are going to
> > hear the giant
> > > rushing sound of a vacuum being created--it will be the
> > cessation of further
> > > work from them, unless other entities provide funding.
> > >
> > > OS/2 is *Dead*.
> >
> > There is a new version of OS/2 under the brand name eComStation.
> > This is an OEM version being vigorously marketed by a company called
> > Serenity Systems for use in specific environments.
> >
> > > The market has spoken,
> >
> > The 'monopoly' has decreed...
> >
> > > and no matter how much it might
> > > be sad (or horrid, since I personally detest windows and use OpenBSD for
> > > real things), but that's the way it is.
> > >
> > > I do comprehend what OS/2 can do. I certainly appreciate it,
> > despite it's not
> > > being my favorite, UNIX. But I also comprehend the fact that
> > the user base
> > > is shrinking. Again, that's sad but true.
> > >
> > > I have an idea, since you say I don't have the slightest idea
> > what I'm talking
> > > about: make a copy of this email on paper, and lets go over it again one
> > > year from now (or say the end of July, one day from now).
> > Let's review things
> > > then and see what the state of affairs is. Anyone else who is
> > interested is
> > > welcome to do this too. If I am wrong and there is more
> > activity then compared
> > > to now, I shall humbly apologize to all.
> > >
> > > I stand behind what I have said. OS/2 use is only going to diminish with
> > > time and
> > > at some point in the future IBM will stop working on it.
> > >
> > > There is ONE interesting scenario which might change this
> > however, which is
> > > if IBM
> > > releases the code to OS/2 and makes it an Open Source project. I don't
> > > know if
> > > that's possible given the historical work that Microsoft did
> > with it, but
> > > if IBM could do
> > > this, then OS/2 would be a viable platform for as long as there
> > were users
> > > doing
> > > things with it, which could be some very long period of time. I fully
> > > recognize that
> > > OS/2 does a lot of things very well, and that ability could
> > propel it's use
> > > into the far
> > > future if the user base were able to maintain it. Failing that,
> > OS/2 will fade.
> >
> > In all this talk about OS/2, there is little mention of Microsoft's
> > trial which has lasted two years and which has shown them to be a monopoly
> > company. Sooner or later, this monopoly situation will end.
> >
> > Maybe people are fed up of getting email viruses which destroy their
> > machines. Some day these people may wake up and discover that using
> > a machine with Windows on it is just asking for trouble and not worth
> > the hassle it causes. The world's media have yet to fathom that a
> > machine can run with alternative OS's, since whenever there is a
> > 'Melissa' or 'I love You' bug in the news, the fact that it only ever
> > effects Windows users is somehow overlooked.
> >
> > > --STeve Andre' (andres_at_msu.edu)
> > >
> > > At 04:06 PM 7/30/00 -0400, you wrote:
> > > >In <4.3.2.7.0.20000730133334.00bfbbc0_at_pilot.msu.edu>, on 07/30/00
> > > > at 01:53 PM, "STeve Andre'" <andres_at_msu.edu> said:
> >
> > --
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
-- Happy trails...** Bill Morrow ** :-) WEB page http://thinkpads.com e-mail: bill_at_thinkpads.com, penzance_at_gate.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:56:16 EST