NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #30/NN_1992_30.iso/spool/comp/os/mswindo/misc/5644

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-21 | 5.9 KB

Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.misc:5644 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3325
Path: sparky!uunet!noc.near.net!hri.com!spool.mu.edu!think.com!rpi!batcomputer!munnari.oz.au!metro!usage!spectrum!pendrith
From: [e-mail] (Mark Pendrith)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: WANTED: Info about Windows NT for new user..
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 20 Dec 92 15:58:58 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark Pendrith)
Organization: none
Lines: 110
Nntp-Posting-Host: henna.spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
> Hi,
>
>   I have been a happy owner of an Amiga 2000 for several years now and it has
>always served me well. However times are changing and I have been interested
>in moving to a new computer with a new multitasking operating system. Well
>after an initial look at Windows 3.0 (3.1?) I wasn't impressed. Well actually
>I WAS impressed with its look and several other things, but it didn't even
>come close to giving me the multitasking versatility of my Amiga. So I then
>decided to just wait it out and see what comes next.. Well low and behold I
>was given word of windows NT. This (From what I was told) is supposed to be
>a brand spanking (replace dos) operating system. Everything will multitask
>without a hassle and it's faster, blah, blah, blah.. So taking all of this
>into consideration I decided to post this in hope for some verification.
>
> One note. I am aware that Windows NT isn't yet available (or so I was told)
>so I am willing to listen to speculation so long as it is based in fact.
>
>  I really only use my Amiga for a few things. Telecommunications, UUCP
>software, Word proccessing, audio sampling, "hacking around", and simple
>programming. Now any computer now a days can do all of this stuff, but I
>virtually designed half of my system. Writting Arexx programs to interlink
>my software together so my terminal software and UUCP software and text
>editors could all talk to each other and act as one program. Also I have
>rewritten a lot of the standard amiga "DOS" commands via Arexx to totally
>customize my system. So the idea of switching to another totally new system
>is scary since I may never be able to make my new system work as easily as
>my old.
>
>  So, with that in mind I have a few questions about Windows NT.
>
>One note, I don't want to hear, "Why don't you just upgrade your Amiga".
>I don't want an Amiga anymore, that's why! :-)
>
>1) Can I simply take ANY program for the pc (commercial or PD) and simply
>run it in this windowed multitasking environment without "setting" anything
>up? With windows I believe you have to set things up just to run a DOS
>program with windows. I want TRUE multitasking without any hassles.
>
>2) Is there a REXX language interpreter for Windows NT? If not has there
>been any talk of this. (I know I should post to comp.lang.rexx)
>
>3) Is there a good UUCP/News implementation developed for Windows that is
>either shareware or PD (I'd be interested in commercial ones too but all
>my Amiga stuff is FIRST rate pd)
>
>4) On the Amiga I can run a program in a window, or I can run a program with
>its own unique "Screen". This screen can have an allowable resolution or
>colors etc. I can at any given time either use the mouse to "drag" one screen
>down and watch another (or several other) screen(s) and their programs and
>use either one or flip screens with mouse gadgets or keyboard commands. This
>to me is much preferable over running everything in a window on one screen.
>This can get very confusing and cluttered. Incidentally I was told that
>windows NT has "Screens" like the Amiga and it is easy to use. (I was also
>told that Windows 3.1 had these too but were more difficult to use).
>
>5) What about Dos restrictions? Does NT get rid of the memory limits and the
>cheesy 12 character filenames all in upper case? etc.. etc..
>
>6) Is NT actually faster than 3.1? What other basic improvements have taken
>place.
>
>7) What are the system requirements? I run an Amiga 2000 at 7.16mhz with 3megs
>of ram and a 40meg hard drive. This does everything I've asked NT to do but
>of course the software base doesn't compare to that of a PC. Not to mention
>that my amiga is a little slow and outdate. What will it take to get a good
>fast NT system going?
>
>8) Finally can someone email me (note the reply-to: header) any offical
>release info on NT in case I forgot to ask something?
>
>
> Thanks in advance to all who reply, I really appreciate any help I can
>get. For those replying by email note the reply-to: header, send all
>email to [e-mail]
>
>Thanks,

you may want to consider os/2 2.0 as a viable alternative, as it seems to
fit your stated needs outlined above somewhat better. viz.

- it is a better general purpose multitasker for the existing huge base of
  DOS and windows 3.x apps. - NT has decided to trade off some backwards
  compatibility for better systems security.

- it is bundled with a nice REXX.

- it is lighter on system resources (eg recommended min RAM 6MB, 8 better.
  NT requirements are currently 12-16MB, although there is speculation this
  may improve once it is out of beta and into general release.)

- os/2 is inexpensive, and even comes with a money back guarantee if you
  can't get it to run on your machine! note that the NT beta comes on a
  CD-ROM, so you have to have a CD-ROM drive even to get to first base
  with the beta.

- finally, os/2 2.0 is not a beta, but available today as tuned, working
  production code. (this was important for me.)

i've been using os/2 2.0 for about 3 months now, and overall i'm very pleased
with it (although i remember i wasn't too pleased when i found that i had to
upgrade my 4MB machine to 8MB to get decent performance out of it... be warned,
the box says 4MB min, but pay no attention).

hope this helps.

- Mark

[e-mail]