Article View: comp.os.os2
Article #521Re: IS IBM UK STILL IN THE STONE AGE???
From: Andrzej Bieszczad
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 04:58
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 04:58
50 lines
3552 bytes
3552 bytes
In article <1992Aug28.230812.8592@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> quan@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Tony Quan) writes: > > This really gives me the willies. Is IBM only going to support >OS/2 on IBM hardware? And, if so, what would be the implications if >OS/2 were to dominate the PC operating system market? > This is a silly post. Everyone knows that IBM supports OS/2 on all PC-compatible hardware and offers a money-back guarantee if they can't get it to work on your hardware. Will Microsoft give me my money back if I can't get Windows 3.1 or NT to work on my hardware? Microsoftians should check up on their facts before posting... Actually, I have been waiting for a refund from Microsoft Canada since June 26, 1992. I returned my Windows 3.1 (cannot run Smalltalk-80 for Windows 3.0 was the reason) by registered (Thanks God !!!) mail on June 19. They received it on June 26. I called a few times and was forced to send copies of my original letter and the mail registration slip (they claimed that I should have sent the package to a person, not an institution - too bad that they did not tell me that before I sent, though I spoke to a person representing the institution). I sent the second letter three weeks ago - no word from Microsoft. I am back at work on Monday after two weeks of vacation - I am going to call the person at the institution. I did not try to return OS/2, so I cannot say what would be the case with IBM. However, I agree with the original posting that there are many frustrated users, or would-be-users, that bought OS/2 (curiosity?) and they put it aside. I do not mind running Excel, WinWord or PowerPoint (all of them I consider excellent applications that I have been using on Macs and PCs - cannot say bad word on Microsoft) under OS/2 even with a small (I repeat SMALL) performance penalty, but OS/2 itself has so many problems that it is not feasible yet. I am waiting for the "fall" (?) CSD to decide once and for all whether I am switching to OS/2 or I am staying in Windows 3.0. Amazingly, for the work that I do it has been the best environment so far. Well - that is at home, so I am not after Windows NT. My employer will be taking care of judging whether we should replace UNIX with Windows NT. At home I can use Windows 3.0 and see what will DOS 6.0 and Windows 4.0 bring. Have a good day, -- ======================================================================== Andrzej Bieszczad | Phone: (613) 763-2259 Bell-Northern Research, Ltd. | Fax: (613) 763-3283 Dept. 9K12, P.O. Box 3511, Station C, | USENET: uunet!bnrgate!eh!andrzej Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1Y 4H7 | BitNet: andrzej@BNR.CA ========================================================================
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<ANDRZEJ.92Aug28235805@bcars268.bnr.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.utdallas.edu!corpgate!bnrgate!bcars267!bcars267!andrzejReferences:
<714913121.20822@minster.york.ac.uk> <1992Aug28.180020.17109@microsoft.com> <1992Aug28.230812.8592@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.programmer,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.advocacy Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.utdallas.edu!corpgate!bnrgate!bcars267!bcars267!andrzej From: andrzej@bnr.ca (Andrzej Bieszczad) Subject: Re: IS IBM UK STILL IN THE STONE AGE??? In-Reply-To: quan@Xenon.Stanford.EDU's message of 28 Aug 92 23:08:12 GMT Message-ID: <ANDRZEJ.92Aug28235805@bcars268.bnr.ca> Sender: news@bnr.ca (usenet) Nntp-Posting-Host: bcars268 Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., References: <714913121.20822@minster.york.ac.uk> <1992Aug28.180020.17109@microsoft.com> <1992Aug28.230812.8592@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 04:58:05 GMT Lines: 51