🚀 go-pugleaf

nsus_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Nick Susch) writes:

>In <1992Aug7.115338.3610@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:

>>In article <BsL5KA.IMD@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib) writes:
>>> 

>Ah, I bought OS/2 and used it for about 2 weeks. It runs the top 100 DOS and
>Windows program, and thats about it. And it runs them VERY SLOWLY if they
>have any graphics at all in them. Why go to OS/2 to run DOS and Windows
>programs? Why not just run them under DOS and Windows, where they were made
>to run, and run a lot faster? OS/2 doesn't give you access to any more
>programs; of the few programs that run under OS/2, they are all available
>for DOS and Windows.

I hate to see this started over hear, but at any rate.  Maybe to have a
more stable system for one.  And so you can do multiple things at once.  I'll
agree that running a single app is sometimes faster under windows.  However,
if you have a number crunching program in the background and you run a word
processor I don't think you would crunch numbers very fast.  True real number
crunching should be done on a cray, but it's nice to see your flow solver
running in the background while you write a paper.
(My Euler flow code took 49 minutes using MS Fortran on a modest grid
under DOS, it took a few seconds over 49 under a DOS box on OS/2 with
nothing else going on.  With AMI PRO 2.0 up and working on a doc it added
about 10-15 minutes to the run time I think.  I look forward to getting
a true 32 bit compiler and let it run in an OS/2 session!)

The number of apps are going to increase.  Why did you go to windows?  Most
all of, if not all of the apps available for windows was availabe for DOS
when windows first came out.  Windows only gave you a pretty desk top and
the ability to switch between apps, but not run them together.

Windows is just right for a lot of people, especially if they spend all day
looking at a word processor and don't mind waiting for a print out before
they go on.

How many megabytes of memory did you have.  Even though the box says 4, in
most cases 6-8 is really needed.(Just like windows gives a minimum, but to
use any real apps with windows you need more than that also.)

My wife is in different to what is on the computer in terms of OS/OE's.  She
is not a computer junkie in any way.  She just does her little things and 
hates for me to switch things on her.  Since we've been using OS/2 2.0 for
about 2 months now I mentioned going back to windows in jest and she had
a cow.  I got a very resolute "We will not use windows again!"  That settles
it for me, the boss says it's so.! :)

Todd
tamu@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu

>--
>They say there is strangeness too dangerous | /\/ick Susch - U. of Rochester
>In our theatres and bookstore shelves,      | nick@blaise.cif.rochester.edu
>That those who know what's best for us      |    or
>Must rise and save us from ourselves.       | nsus_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu
>				   -RUSH