home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!newsflash.concordia.ca!mizar.cc.umanitoba.ca!access.usask.ca!jester.usask.ca!lowey
- From: lowey@jester.usask.ca (CrazyMan)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
- Subject: Re: why OS/2
- Date: 5 Jan 1993 03:44:10 GMT
- Organization: University of Saskatchewan
- Lines: 113
- Distribution: na
- Message-ID: <1ib06aINNi2i@access.usask.ca>
- References: <1993Jan4.221904.438@mr.med.ge.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: jester.usask.ca
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
-
- sdk@med.ge.com wrote:
- : After reading IBM literature, talking with one individual and
- : thinking about the postings here I decided that I should post
- : several questions and study the responses before making any
- : purchases.
- :
- : 1. If you value the ability to multi task as a driver to use
- : OS/2, how much to you **really** multitask ?
-
- Here are a few of the things I multitask:
-
- - Compiles in the background
- - Ray tracing in the background
- - File downloads in the background.
- - Occasionally, I forget to do something before starting a program, like
- unpack a .ZIP file I need to edit or something. I can easily pop up
- another command screen, fix it up, then pop back to the original to
- continue doing what I'm doing.
- - People can connect to my machine through the network, and access files
- while I do other things.
-
- - I can have two programs running at the same time, and then
- transfer information between them. For example, I can grab
- something displayed on my terminal program, and paste it into my
- editor, or visa versa.
-
- - Even when using only ONE program, OS/2 has the advantage of being able
- to multitask within programs (multi-threading). For example, my Word
- Processor will redraw complex graphics in the WYSIWYG editor, while
- AT THE SAME TIME I can enter text and have it displayed. No more waiting
- for the entire screen to be redrawn before I can type.
-
- : 2. Is there any context in which OS/2 can be used to multitask
- : and **not** force the user into a 'windows' mode ? This
- : question in regard to (1) several user developed tasks that
- : only require non graphical I/O or (2) do the multitude of
- : existing DOS applications programs only work in the window
- : mouse world ?
-
- I don't understand the question. The Workplace Shell is an OS/2
- application. You don't need to run it. Some people have completely
- non-graphical full screen OS/2 systems. You can easily run
- non-presentation manager applications full screen simply by clicking
- on the "Full screen session" Icon, then ignore the graphic desktop
- from then on if you wish.
-
- : 3. How would you rate OS/2 as an operating system if it's
- : user interface were limited to a text based command line
- : interpreter ? Does it have such a facility ?
-
- Yes it has this capability. It can use the START and DETACH commands
- to start background applications in this mode, even without the GUI
- loaded. Switching between these applications is not easy however
- without the GUI. I'd rate OS/2's command line to be better than DOS,
- but not as flexible as c-shell.
-
- One big plus is the REXX batch programming language, which is much
- better than the .BAT language, and more on a par with something like
- Perl.
-
- However, you are missing most of the advantages of OS/2 if you stick
- strictly to full-screen sessions.
-
- : 4. Does the OS/2 file system allow a user to keep many versions
- : of a file ? (like VMS)
-
- Not built into the operating system automatically. However, with the
- long filenames, there's no reason why applications can't have files
- called FILE.TXT.2 and FILE.TXT.3 etc. and handle the multiple versions
- itself. Note that these would only be visible to OS/2 applications,
- not DOS programs.
-
- : 5. Are tasks limited by the amount of physical memory configured or
- :does the concept (of virtual memory) extend to some part of the system disk ?
-
- Virtual memory extends to EVERY ASPECT OF OS/2. OS/2 doesn't
- differentiate between physical RAM and free disk space. If the memory
- request cannot be fulfilled by existing free RAM, then OS/2
- automatically pages memory to disk. This applies equally well for
- memory for OS/2 full-screen programs, OS/2 Presentation Manager
- programs, DOS applications, and Windows applications.
-
- : 6. Finally, put yourself in the position of asking this question:
- : I am not a Icon-Mouse-Window person, what can I accomplish with
- : this OS/2 tool ?
-
- First, I have no idea what it means to be an "Icon-Mouse-Window"
- person. Second, I have no idea what you WANT to accomplish, so it's
- hard for me to tell you what you CAN accomplish.
-
- Given that, I must admit that you will have to learn how to use a
- mouse if you want to use OS/2. Although it is POSSIBLE to use nothing
- but full-screen, it isn't very pretty or very easy. At the minimum,
- you will need to use the GUI to start your first full-screen session,
- and how to shut down the system when you are done. After that, you
- can pretty much forget about it.
-
- However, that's like buying a Porche, and only using the glove
- compartment. Don't say "I'm not a Windows-Mouse-Icon person" and
- instead give it a fair chance. Who knows, you might even like it.
-
- :
- : I should add that my hardware platform is 25 Mhz 386, micro channel with
- : a 120 Mb disk and 8 Mb Ram.
-
- I use a 80486/33 with a 210M disk and 8M RAM. Your CPU is adequate,
- but close to low end so don't expect it to be as fast as a 486. Your
- memory is the minimum I'd use. If you do a full install, including
- swap file size, you will have about 70M free (I'm being conservative).
-
- - Kevin Lowey (Lowey@Sask.USask.CA)
- >>>>> Anonymous FTP to FTP.USASK.CA for DOS, OS/2, and Windows programs <<<<<
-
-