Subj : Re: OS/2 anyone.
To   : All
From : =?iso-8859-1?q?tholen=40ant=ECspam=
Date : Sat Jan 05 2013 12:53 pm

On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:07:45 -0500, Bob Campbell wrote:

1> Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy

1> There is really no reason to use OS/2 as your only computer these days.
1>    Unless you like banging your head against the wall.

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

1> However, it remains an interesting thing to play with.

Classic erroneous presupposition.

1> The challenge of getting it to do anything useful is fun - assuming
1> you like challenges.

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

1> For example, I just got the networking going, and got Thunderbird
1> running here.

Good for you.

1> I used to use OS/2 all the time, but that was 20 years ago. It got me
1> thru the Windows 3.0/3.1 era.

It can get you thru[sic] the Windows 8 era, too.

1> OS/2 2.1 and 3.0 ran Win 3.1 and DOS apps better than Win 3.1 and
1> DOS.

Classic pontification.

1> When Win 95 and NT 4 became available, I abandoned OS/2 since it was
1> clear IBM was also.   When Will Zachmann came to the same conclusion a
1> year or so later, everyone knew it was all over for OS/2.

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

1> These days OS/2 is little more than a historical curiosity.

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

1> Along with others like the many Unix OSes (Coherent, Xenix etc. among
1> many others I had), the Apple Lisa, the Apple ///, TRS-80s and the
1> dozen or so OSes they had, CPM etc. etc.

What does that have to do with OS/2, Campbell?

1> All gone, some nearly forgotten.

Unlike OS/2.

--- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
* Origin: Murphy-Foam Detoxification Squad (1:116/18@fidonet)