🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <mirage.716509864@camelot> mirage@camelot.bradley.edu (Jeffrey Hoffman) writes:
>
>I am interested in the opinions of those who have seen/used Desqview/X.
>
>I have no prior experience with Desqview, so I would appreciate comparisons
>with Windows.  Any details, features or shortcomings would be very helpful.
>
>Is it worth the money?  Is OS/2 a better choice?  More stable?

If you are just interested in DOS multitasking, there is no reason to get
DesqView/X as opposed to regular Desqview.  The ONLY reason to consider
Desqview/X is if you're running on a network with access to other machines
running X.

I find Desqview/X to be somewhat unstable, especially under low memory
conditions.

Windows runs Windows programs better than DV/X or DV, and it's DOS support is
acceptable.

OS/2 runs Windows programs better than DV-DV/X, and DOS programs better as
well.  It also MUCH more stable than DV/X.

OS/2 running IBM's TCP/IP+NFS+X has the following advantages over DV/X running
over FTP's PC/TCP:
  - faster
  - more powerful and capable
  - cheaper
  - more stable.

Windows X solutions (i.e. Hummingbird products PC/X) are also faster than
DV/X, but suffer from some stability problems as well. (Probably NOT due to
Windows.)

I don't want people to get the idea I'm down on DV/X... I think it's a nice
idea... But after evaluating several products, I just don't think it's
mature enough yet to beat OS/2, which has the same hardware requirements,
or perhaps even Windows, which is less taxing to your system.

Questions and inquiries welcome, but no flames, please.  I'm not trying to
start an OS/2-DOS-Windows argument.


-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________ Will E. Rose                                   GSB-CS: wer5@gsbsun.uchicago.edu
GSB Computing Services                         UCCO:   wer5@midway.uchicago.edu
------------The University of Chicago - Graduate School of Business------------