Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!news
From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger)
Subject: Re: (Sigh) Here we go again...
In-Reply-To: tholen@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu's message of 4 May 91 03:46:05 GMT
Message-ID: <z.8Grjy=1@cs.psu.edu>
Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet)
Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws5.sys.cs.psu.edu
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
References: <12847@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu>
Date: Sat, 4 May 91 13:27:42 GMT
Lines: 60


In article <12847@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> tholen@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (David Tholen) writes:

   Yes, OS/2 was designed as a single-user operating system.  It was designed
   for the PC, and the P stands for "personal".  Nevertheless, I have read
   about at least two companies that have licensed the source code for OS/2
   and built multi-user capabilities on top of the basic system, so if you
   want multi-user OS/2, you can have it.  As for me, I am the only person
   using my computer, so why should I saddle it with all sorts of multi-user
   capabilities that I'll never use?  There are lots of Sun workstations out
   there now that sit on a person's desk and get used by only one person, so
   all of that wonderful UNIX multi-user capability isn't being used anyway.

Forget that personal computer stuff.  The NeXT is more of a personal
computer than a multiuser workstation.  My big hangup with using two
different OS's is: what's the point.  When I sit down at a $2000
machine why should things be any different than if I sit down at a
$20,000 machine?  I would like the interface to be the same.  How do
the added features hurt by being there?  In fact can you see the
senerio where you leave your computer on all day so you are able to
call it from work(or where ever you are) to do some work, or get some
documents that you forgot.  Of course, you can always jump back in the
car and drive 20mins-2 hours to get home.

   I don't follow you here.  OS/2 does have directories.  So does DOS for that
   matter.  The era of the central mainframe computer with dumb terminals on
   people's desks is giving way to the distributed computing approach we're
   seeing nowadays, with multiple CPUs connected via networks.  PCs running
   OS/2 can be easily networked.  I think this is what IBM had in mind for
   multiple users.

What additional features does OS/2 offer over Unix(honest question)?
Someone mentioned that you can interrupt the kernal.  Is OS/2
realtime(I think I'm getting things confused here)?  DOS compatibility
isn't a feature with me.  Anyway, it's only a software emulation
program away.

   Yes, they are apples and oranges (figuratively speaking).  If you need
   extensive multi-user support, UNIX is the obvious choice.  If you don't,
   OS/2 is an excellent choice.  I use both, but I must say that I like OS/2
   better, if for no other reason than the fact that I know enough to run an
   OS/2 system myself; UNIX machines often need system administrators to
   manage the system, and you had better know C.  I am constantly annoyed by
   changes in the behavior of our UNIX systems, and I can usually trace the
   problem to something a system administrator did.  With my OS/2 PC, I get
   consistent behavior, because I'm in control.

I haven't done any adminstation on the NeXT's so I can't tell you how
easy or hard it is(anyone else care to try), but I don't think that
you need to know C.

And if you own a Unix machine, you are in control of it too.  I get
the impression that your experience with Unix is very limited.

My personal opinion is that I will be glad to see OS/2 2.0 FINALLY get
here.  It's a major improvement over DOS and Windows, and the world
needs it.

 -Mike

