1. Forum
  2. FidoNet
  3. OS2

  • Re: OS/2 anyone.

    From Bob Campbell@1:116/18 to All on Saturday, December 29, 2012 11:07:45
    On 11/16/12 04:55 am, dccxxvii wrote:
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the plethora of
    junk he generated has died down, would anyone actually interested in
    OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might want use it in preference to
    other OS's?

    There is really no reason to use OS/2 as your only computer these days.
    Unless you like banging your head against the wall.

    However, it remains an interesting thing to play with. The challenge
    of getting it to do anything useful is fun - assuming you like
    challenges. For example, I just got the networking going, and got
    Thunderbird running here.

    I used to use OS/2 all the time, but that was 20 years ago. It got me
    thru the Windows 3.0/3.1 era. OS/2 2.1 and 3.0 ran Win 3.1 and DOS apps better than Win 3.1 and DOS. When Win 95 and NT 4 became available, I abandoned OS/2 since it was clear IBM was also. When Will Zachmann
    came to the same conclusion a year or so later, everyone knew it was all
    over for OS/2.

    These days OS/2 is little more than a historical curiosity. Along with
    others like the many Unix OSes (Coherent, Xenix etc. among many others I
    had), the Apple Lisa, the Apple ///, TRS-80s and the dozen or so OSes
    they had, CPM etc. etc.

    All gone, some nearly forgotten.

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: DisOrg, Inc. (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From =?iso-8859-1?q?tholen=40ant=ECspam=@1:116/18 to All on Saturday, January 05, 2013 12:53:58
    On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:07:45 -0500, Bob Campbell wrote:

    Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy

    There is really no reason to use OS/2 as your only computer these days.
    Unless you like banging your head against the wall.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    However, it remains an interesting thing to play with.

    Classic erroneous presupposition.

    The challenge of getting it to do anything useful is fun - assuming
    you like challenges.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    For example, I just got the networking going, and got Thunderbird
    running here.

    Good for you.

    I used to use OS/2 all the time, but that was 20 years ago. It got me
    thru the Windows 3.0/3.1 era.

    It can get you thru[sic] the Windows 8 era, too.

    OS/2 2.1 and 3.0 ran Win 3.1 and DOS apps better than Win 3.1 and
    DOS.

    Classic pontification.

    When Win 95 and NT 4 became available, I abandoned OS/2 since it was
    clear IBM was also. When Will Zachmann came to the same conclusion a
    year or so later, everyone knew it was all over for OS/2.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    These days OS/2 is little more than a historical curiosity.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    Along with others like the many Unix OSes (Coherent, Xenix etc. among
    many others I had), the Apple Lisa, the Apple ///, TRS-80s and the
    dozen or so OSes they had, CPM etc. etc.

    What does that have to do with OS/2, Campbell?

    All gone, some nearly forgotten.

    Unlike OS/2.

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Murphy-Foam Detoxification Squad (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From -= Usenet Legend Robert James =-@1:116/18 to All on Wednesday, January 16, 2013 17:01:58
    Reply-To: Matthew Moulton's Killfile.

    On 05 Jan 2013; tholenbot glugged down some extra strong DXM
    cough syrup and vomited all over Usenet. I am so pissed that
    tholenbot selfishly hogged the whole bottle without sharing
    some with me:

    On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:07:45 -0500, Bob Campbell wrote:

    Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy

    There is really no reason to use OS/2 as your only computer these
    days. 1> Unless you like banging your head against the wall.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    However, it remains an interesting thing to play with.

    Classic erroneous presupposition.

    The challenge of getting it to do anything useful is fun - assuming
    you like challenges.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    For example, I just got the networking going, and got Thunderbird
    running here.

    Good for you.

    I used to use OS/2 all the time, but that was 20 years ago. It got
    me 1> thru the Windows 3.0/3.1 era.

    It can get you thru[sic] the Windows 8 era, too.

    OS/2 2.1 and 3.0 ran Win 3.1 and DOS apps better than Win 3.1 and
    DOS.

    Classic pontification.

    When Win 95 and NT 4 became available, I abandoned OS/2 since it
    was 1> clear IBM was also. When Will Zachmann came to the same
    conclusion a 1> year or so later, everyone knew it was all over for
    OS/2.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    These days OS/2 is little more than a historical curiosity.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    Along with others like the many Unix OSes (Coherent, Xenix etc.
    among 1> many others I had), the Apple Lisa, the Apple ///, TRS-80s
    and the 1> dozen or so OSes they had, CPM etc. etc.

    What does that have to do with OS/2, Campbell?

    All gone, some nearly forgotten.

    Unlike OS/2.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous follow-up. What does
    alt.usenet.kooks have to do with alt.test, tholenbot?

    --
    http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/5393/chatzombiesucks.jpg http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/03/08/1015365742538.html http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/709-what-should-we-do.html http://www.ricksblog.com/my_weblog/2010/12/moron-alert.html

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Canadian coalition against international Usenet f (1:116/18@fidonet)