🚀 go-pugleaf

Edmond wrote:
> 

> >
> >This is completely WRONG.  NT's a poor chocie for Engineering and I know
> >first hand that OS/2 is replacing DOS/WFWG as an Engineeing platform for
> >data aquisition.
> >
> 
> For someone who has never used NT, your still running at the mouth eh.  NT
> is an excellent platform for engineering as it's advanced graphics API
> capabilities make it ideal for modelling and design.  Data aquisition?
> Like National Instruments?  They've done a lot with NT over the last
> couple of years.  Labview has been running strong under NT for quite a
> while now.

Nice Edmond.  

OS/2 is the OS that is taken to the field.  

> >NT cannot be run without the UI while OS/2 can be run in character mode.
> >OS/2 is a far lighter and easier to embed OS.  (That's why OS/2 is used
> >for ATMs and in stores for mmedia terminals).
> >
> 
> Most engineers are into graphics now-a-days.  It's a makes it easier to
> design.

Baloney.  The option of using a UI is what makes OS/2 more popular.
One offers a choice, one does not.  You do not need a GUI to collect
air temperature data or to write the code to do so.

> >OS/2 runs on laptops with less power drain than NT!!!!
> >This is hugely critical to us scientist and engineers!!
> >
> 
> You didn't test this.  This is heresay at best though there are no auto
> shut down features under NT as there is under Win95.  

OS/2 uses less resources than NT.  NT's a poor laptop OS for which MS
recommends Win95.  What do I have to test?   

The people I work with -- the ones who design and program laptops 
tried win95 and OS/2.   Why would they even bother to pay $319
for NT even if it was a good as OS/2 ?  

> Most laptops will do
> this anyway.  I don't doubt what you say about this, but it's coming from
> the wrong person as I seriously doubt you have any experience in this.

Oh so you have no answer.
Well the software that is being used in the filed has been migrated
to OS/2.  DOE's Oak Ridge Lab did this work and projects that monitor
plant/atmosphere/soil dynamics all use this software.

 
> >For instrumentation, OS/2 can replace 3 DOS laptops with
> >one premeptively multitasking OS/2 laptop.  It's better than
> >legacy systems based on DOS and is fully functional in 4 MB of RAM.
> >
> This is fantasy island stuff at best by the way.

No.  It's preemptive multitasking.  It's exactly how we are
instrumenting or Oregon Site.  The software came from DOE and
it's not GUI.  That would be stupid to make a GUI program.
 
> Some do and some don't.  You don't speak for the entire organization, just
> a small faction.

I speak and you squirm.  No answer.  At least I can list why
 
> >Locally NASA's got some researchers doing AI embedding and the
> >OS they run is OS/2.  NT's horribly suited for this and WIn95 was
> >tried and dropped because it's not a robust multi-tasking OS.
>
> LOCALLY.  This is not the entire NASA organization (nor vindicative of
> it) by ANY means of the word.

So what?  Do you have a point besides harrassment?
I was very honest about my local experiences at this site.  

I also know the field instrumentation market.  It's not that
large and only a few people do the software.  If win95 were usable they
would not have said it was not usable.  If NT was a good laptop 
OS then MS would not say WIn95 was and if tey needed a GUI for 
the software they would have added one.

If NT or win95 were good for tehse tasks than ATM  would all get
16MB or RAM and run a GUI NT interface.  They do not.
 
> Huh?  If you add one non-MS OS you have problems?  Problems with what?
> You must have meant non-MS software.  In any case, it sounds quite
> unsubstantiated.

How does NT work with OpenDoc?  Or CORBA ? How do you configure NT
to replace a UNIX DNS ?  MS makes no bones about it.  MS software 
works best with MS software.  Why would you want to argue that point?

> Compete?  As in how?  Let's hear more.

What do you do for a living.  tell us so we can devise a test.
Who do you work for?

-- Dr. Joseph C. Coughlan, jcoughlan@gaia.arc.nasa.gov