🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Article #643

Re: OS/2 and ET4000 cards

#643
From: Steve.Withers
Date: Sun, 09 Aug 1992 01:47
40 lines
2857 bytes
In article <BsMHHB.3Ft@news.cso.uiuc.edu> tamu@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Henderson) writes:
> nsus_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Nick Susch) writes:
> 
> >In <1992Aug7.115338.3610@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz 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.

From the way this is set up, you might think I wrote the above. I didn't (I
think Iskandar Tahb did). As far os OS/2 running the top 100 DOS and Windows
apps is concerned - that is total crap. Lie would be a better word, but I
don't think Iskandar is being deliberatley misleading.

> 
> 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.

OS/2 multi-tasks so smoothly it makes Windows look like dog doo-doo.
Especially with native OS/2 apps - of which I have a growing number (DeScribe,
Bitfax, etc....). I can send and receive faxes in the background with
virtually no degradation in performance. Windows *never* did that. 
 
As for the video card question that started this thread, OS/2 will do
640x480x16 with almost any card in existence. If you want SVGA, the range
narrows to only about a dozen of the most popular cards and their clones.
-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | "But the glory kept shining
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         |  and bright in my eyes, 
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            |  And the stars going round in 
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       |  my head." R. L. S.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Aug9.014738.90@actrix.gen.nz>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!waikato.ac.nz!comp.vuw.ac.nz!actrix!Steve.Withers
References: <1992Aug7.115338.3610@actrix.gen.nz> <1992Aug7.153955.19526@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> <BsMHHB.3Ft@news.cso.uiuc.edu>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!waikato.ac.nz!comp.vuw.ac.nz!actrix!Steve.Withers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 and ET4000 cards
Message-ID: <1992Aug9.014738.90@actrix.gen.nz>
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 1992 01:47:38 GMT
Sender: Steve.Withers@actrix.gen.nz (Steve Withers)
References: <1992Aug7.115338.3610@actrix.gen.nz> <1992Aug7.153955.19526@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> <BsMHHB.3Ft@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange
Lines: 40