🚀 go-pugleaf

In <pearsonc.21.0008B5D3@melbpc.org.au>, pearsonc@melbpc.org.au (Pearson Cresswell) writes:
>In article <59lcnr$lf5@mippet.ci.com.au> Antonio Lam <laman@accsoft.com.au> writes:
>
>>In Australia, one of the leading PC magazine, PC User, comparing Win95, 
>>WinNT and OS/2 Warp in the Operation System Section of the Vol 9 Number 
>>1 January 1997 issue, says:
>
>>"Both OS/2 and NT directly support RAID (redundant array of inexpensive 
>>drives) for reliable sky's-the-limit storage, while Windows 95 doesn't.  
>>On the other hand, OS/2 Warp needs help to handle IDE disks larger than 
>>512kb."
>
>>That is ridiculous, 512kb is smaller than space available on the floppy 
>>disk.  I think he is talking about the 512MB BIOS limitation.  Could 
>>someone knowledgable write to the editor on "pcuser@apc.com.au" and 
>>explain to the author what 512MB limit is.
>
>Rubbish as you rightly say. I have just installed a second drive (850 MB) on 
>an old system. The BIOS and DOS can't see over 512MB but OS/2 has no trouble.
>
>Note that is in any case necessary to have DOS/FAT partitions at the beginning 
>of the disk as DOS can't see the HPFS partitions.
>
>Pearson

I wrote a nasty letter to that illiterate "writer" as soon as I read that appauling
article.. 512k.. Hmmm ... Did you also note that the WarpCenter cannot be moved from the top? Yeah
right, considering that is how I have mine! (ie on the bottom).. Oh yeah, and the
article also stated that it could multitask on par with Windows95.. <-- funny or what!

Annoyed by ignorant writers... (I also told him to use the OS before writing about it)

Anthony Beckett (#os2's OS2Avatar (au.undernet.org))
TeamOS/2