But you talk about OS/2 in the past tense? True, it hasn't quite lived up
to what it was originally intended as, which was a desktop platform in the
style of Windows 95, but more stable; but it has found its niche in recent
years as a server platform. As an open advocate of OS/2 =) I have always
found it to be stable, reliable, and most of all, fast, compared to its
Microsoft counter-offerings. It's too bad the application support just
isn't there; OS/2 supports OpenGL, you'd think more people would port
games to it.
If you haven't tried it, I would urge you to check it out. IBM in the past
had an offer for a demonstration version of Warp, which was fully
functional, but did not have the BonusPak that comes with the retail
version, and which had a demo nag screen when you booted the system.
I'm not sure if this is still available.
> Was this just flame bait or what?
> I think you have it reversed. UNIX has true multi-tasking, NT
> comes close but 1 little program can take your whole system with
> it, and I think OS/2 was in the middle.
> --Angus - WinNT: The server wanna-be
>
> Correct me if i am wrong, but UNIX is the only OS that comes close to true
> multitasking, as well as WinNT.. correct?? Does the mud run faster/better
> with out as much lag under a multitasking OS as opposed to DOS or Windows
> 95/98? I've used Cygnus' GNUWin32 and i didn't like it..or rather..my
> system didn't like it.
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST