From: sorourke@lonestar.utsa.edu (Sean J. Orourke) Subject: Re: Info World and MS-DOS 6 Date: Fri, 21 May 1993 05:03:54 GMT
In article <ins559n.737950826@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au> ins559n@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Andrew Bulhak) writes:
>jgearhar@tuba.calpoly.edu (Jesse Gearhart) writes:
>
>>OS/2 flies on my 386/33 with 8megs of ram. No crashing, never had a
>>problem with it's partition (I do have plenty of free space for a
>>swapper.dat that's never gotten over 8megs (note: defaults at four
>>anyway). A friend of mine tried Linux. Filled with bugs in the
>>X/Windows portion. Dos emulation stank, and the programs he wanted to
>>run didn't exist. He loved it because it was a UNIX on his PC, but he
>>need real support. He went back to OS/2.
>
>Firstly, Linux' DOS emulation is not yet complete. It is an alpha release; it
>will work with some things (i.e., Turbo Pascal), but not with others (the
>MS-DOS editor/QBasic). MS-Windows will (alas!) not run on Linux. As for
>applications, there are plenty of non-commercial applications (GNU C++/EMACS
>and xv are two that come to mind). Granted, there are no Lotus 1-2-3s or
>WordPerfects at the moment, but there is a Xenix emulator under development
>and that will run Xenix software as it runs on Xenix.
>
>(And also, xtetris is more fun than Windows Solitaire and OS/2 Chess put
>together; now when Microsoft produce Microsoft News.....)
>
>>Selling Boot Manager might be a good idea,... But I STILL! recommend
>>OS/2 itself!
>
>OS/2 2.1 may be a good idea if it fixes the problems of 2.0 (i.e., lack of
>drivers, crashing on some machines, high memory consumption, etc.) But still,
>you won't get an optimising C/C++ compiler with it, whereas with Linux you
>do.
>
Well, with OS/2 you have to spend some time downloading EMX...but I have no
doubt that it's just as good and just as free as Linux's compiler.
>>--
>>Jesse Gearhart | OS/2 and Rush Limbaugh: Succeeding despite
>>jgearhar@oboe.calpoly.edu | the media's best efforts.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>I love this. The good ol' Anti-OS/2 Conspiracy theory. I wonder how many
>OS/2 afficionados are living in a siege mentality, visualising the
>evil forces of Emperor BiLL massing around them from every direction.....
>
I always wondered myself whether there was a reason for this .signature.
Does Rush use OS/2? Or is the only link between the two the conspiracy
theories?
It's easy to see the factual information that has grown into both of these
theories. IBM does far less advertising than Microsoft, and reviewers/editors
evidently take such things into consideration; Bill Gates went on TV saying
"OS/2 is dead" when that isn't his decision and IBM had announced nothing of
the type. As for Rush, I hope we can agree that these days the media is mostly
pretty liberal... and there are as many people that dislike Rush and are very
vocal about it as there are people who support him.
For the record, I run OS/2 and hate Rush Limbaugh.