Article View: comp.windows.misc
Article #73More Win3.1 vs OS/2? (Was: Windows NT and 3.1)
From: Thomas Wong
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1992 22:51
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1992 22:51
89 lines
6179 bytes
6179 bytes
In article <4gwoiB1w165w@spectrx.saigon.com> runt@spectrx.saigon.com (Max de dios) writes: >Does Windows NT take over the job of the age old DOS? Hopefully if it doesit >will do what DOS + Windows 3.0 (or 3.0) didn't succeed in (i.e. a fast OS that >is friendly but not made for stupid people.) I also hope that the thing will >have more power than the current windows 3.0 (or 3.1) running under DOS 5.0. > Well then, instead of upgrading to Win 3.1, you can upgrade to OS/2 2.0 for about the same price. Here is my $0.02 worth of review. No flames please, this is just my observation thus far. I just had my first real good look at OS/2 yesterday. And I gotta say. I'm impressed! Its object oriented format has finally made a PC windowing system as useful as the Mac's envirnment, not like the very limited Windows. You can finally do things that make sense like dragging a color into a window and Pow! the window changes to that color. Or dragging a scheme to the window and the window is now setted to that scheme. You can drag the most used applications out into the desktop so that you don't have to go up and down 2000 levels of windows to get to the next application that you want. And set it as shadow so that whatever you do to this copy, it also changes the orginal. All these folders and applications are independent so that the subwindows are not restricted to the area within the upper window. eg. In Windows, everything is within the boundaries of the Program Manager and if you start moving lower windows (like Windows Appl...etc) around, they become hidden as they go past the edge of the boundary and so forth. Files are icons so that you can drag a file on top of the print manager and or a file onto an application and the files gets loaded and the application gets executed. Or double click on a file and the application that's associated to it automatically gets executed and the file loaded. I can go on and on about how wonderful this object oriented scheme is where things are objects and you can do what seems natural like dragging an object onto another object and things gets done depending on what gets drag onto what. Put a drill on top of a piece of wood and you expect the drill to drill a hole in the piece of wood. But those of you who have used Macs and Unix windowing system already know how wonderful object oriented windowing systems are. I'm glad IBM is finally pulling away from Windows and catching up to the rest of the computing world. And of course we all know that OS/2 is a completely new operation system so things are done right from the ground up. Windows still runs under DOS so.... it'll always run under DOS, until Windows NT, whenever that comes out. So with OS/2, you can do true multitasking. I can format a disk in one window, print a file in another window and be playing a game while I'm waiting in the third. In Windows, when one window is executing, all other windows stops. And if I am working on a portable, I can get the OS2's print manager to spool all the print jobs and forget about it. Then do my work and do all the printing I want and it'd all be spooled. Then when I get back to the office, plug in the printer and everything gets printed. And while the files are spooled, I can look at the files or copy it onto another disk...etc. And since it is a completely new operating system (should you choose that mode, you can stay as DOS), you get more info with your file system like last modify time, creation time,...etc of each file. You can have long names with your file (no more 8 letters then 3 letter extension resitrictions with DOS). OS/2 runs in 32 bit mode, the operating system itself, and talks in 386 code whereas DOS is still talking 8086 so that it's downward compatible. (Yes, you need at least a 386 to run OS/2. But 386s everyone I know has moved into the 386 level if not 486 level by now. Even those with only a 20 Mhx 386 only). So the high performance filesystems runs A LOT faster. And we all already know that OS/2 is DOS compatible and Windows 3.0 compatible. When it gets WIn 3.1 compatible over the summer, OS/2 owners can get a free upgrade to this newer version. And get this, you can boot a floopy in a window. In other words, I can be running OS/2, then put a DOS 2.1 boot disk in my drive and boot a window from floppy as DOS 2.1, or even better yet, boot a game disk (some games expect you to boot from the floppy to run) in a window and have it run separately. And OS/2 comes with a command line window so that you can make use of the OS/2 features for those who likes to type and use command line. All Windows can do is open up a DOS window, but we don't get to use Window's features within since it's only a DOS window. Does it run Windows faster than Windows? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. The first Windows application is slow but once it loads the first Windows application and have Windows system loaded, the rest of the Windows applications comes up fast. All the documentations are online with OS/2. It also comes with a tutorial online as well. Comes with goodies like you see in Unix windows like Pulse (shows a graph of CPU usage), basic spreadsheet, planner, calendar, clock....etc. I can go on and on but I won't. :) But since the OS/2 upgrade price and the Win3.1 upgrade price are about the same (IBM did it right this time by making OS/2 cheap), a lot of others might migrate over to OS/2 since it can run all 3 types of environments. But I'll probably get both OS/2 and Win 3.1 just for the heck of it. :) Thomas.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Apr7.225132.11063@unixg.ubc.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!van-bc!ubc-cs!unixg.ubc.ca!twongReferences:
<4gwoiB1w165w@spectrx.saigon.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.windows.misc Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!van-bc!ubc-cs!unixg.ubc.ca!twong From: twong@civil.ubc.ca (Thomas Wong) Subject: More Win3.1 vs OS/2? (Was: Windows NT and 3.1) Message-ID: <1992Apr7.225132.11063@unixg.ubc.ca> Keywords: What are Keywords? Sender: news@unixg.ubc.ca (Usenet News Maintenance) Nntp-Posting-Host: sam.civil.ubc.ca Organization: Dept. of Civil Engineering, U.B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada References: <4gwoiB1w165w@spectrx.saigon.com> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 22:51:32 GMT