Source of revenues in the future if the have some sucess… Not gonna advertise in my site, or pay me money… I dont even talk about the FSF retarded hippies!Īt best the big companies that now move to Linux, and pretend to be Open Source, worth a little bit, and may be a Is not easy to have sexual relations tru an USB port, or a FireWire one… but I am in love anyway!…Īnything that is not Mac or commercial, is just wacko rubbish!Īnd, of course, is not going to offer me anything, because all these Open Source weirdos have no future, and are Me and my Mac go together everywhere, I even sleep with it, which is somehow problematic, cause as you can imagine, Yes, I know more than anyone of you about Computers, and about anything else you can imagine! even If many people I think I know more than the rest, of course… and I am always right! Offer… for the sake of these IT weirdos geeks and Open source-free computing fanboys…? c’mon… If not, why should I loose my time looking for IT news in other IT Web Sites that offer what I am not able to I pretend that I do it for the sake of love for IT, but the fact is that, I am expecting good revenues for the I work in a Website that offers news of IT and Open Source. Nothing like working on Vegas and Pintos at work and going home and using something that works a lot better. I have to support XP at work now and soon Vista. Now if they could get it so eComstation ran on my Core 2 Duo iMac I could run it in VMware. Links Golf for DOS is a great example.Īnother great thing was that I could have multiple modems connecting to different remote servers gathering performance data (or whatever) or I could be remotely updating two or more servers at a time with every loosing any connections. So even DOS programs ran better in a DOS box on OS/2 than running them in DOS (no Windows). Plus you had more control of memory settings for each and every program. Did you need to work on 15 things at the same time? (Updating servers remotely, recalcing a big spreadsheet, etc.) No problem. It was amazing how many programs you could have running on OS/2 at the same time with a 386 or 486 computer. The most impressive thing was that I could literally has one computer do the work of four Windows 3.11 or Windows ‘9x computers on the SAME hardware.Īs another person said. Windows (even with Vista) still hasn’t gotten the user interface to be as good as OS/2 has been since 1992. OS/2 is/was FAR better than DOS, Win3.1, Win9x and only (in some ways but not others) caught up by Windows 2000. OS/2 and eComStation are still worth to be mentioned being present in the OS field. It even supports multiple virtual desktops. You might want to have a look at where you can see some impressive screenshots. OS/2 was more stable, offered better multimedia support and could even run DOS applications in multitasking. My friends using it were happy with it – happier than with “Windows” 3.1 before and ’95/’98 after. It was used as OEM operating system and came preinstalled on PCs for some time. I had my own experience with OS/2 3.0 many years ago, I found it was quite cool. Programmers used the OS/2 boxes for programming and performing the dialog with the AS/400 and, of course, to work with the results (doing statistics, diagrams, reports, bills etc.). I’ve seen OS/2 being used together with IBM mainframes (AS/400 eSeries) at our local financial authority (Oberfinanzdirection). I think it was something having to do with running the spots at certain times of the day. “I’ve only ever seen this in use at one place….my old college radio station.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |