home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.misc:43429 comp.os.os2.advocacy:12571
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!src.honeywell.com!tcscs!zeta
- From: tcscs!zeta@src.honeywell.com (Gregory Youngblood)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.advocacy
- Subject: Re: Is OS/2 a dead end?
- Message-ID: <26kqXB6w165w@tcscs.UUCP>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 12:02:00 CST
- References: <jwiers01.727594942@uther>
- Reply-To: zeta%tcscs@src.honeywell.com
- Organization: TCS Consulting Services
- Lines: 35
-
- jwiers01@uther.calvin.edu (James Wiersma) writes:
-
- > dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) writes:
- >
- >
- > >In a previous article, feg@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (forrest.e.gehrke) says:
- >
- > >>PC Week for January 18th has an interview with Bill Gates.
- > >>I quote the relevant item:
- > >>
- > >>PC Week: Your feeling is that OS/2 is a dead-end platform?
- > >>
- > >>Gates: It's certainly a dead end. That's indisputable.
- > >>Nobody would dispute that it's a dead end.
- >
- > >I think Bill Gates has finally gone off his rocker and started to
- > >believe the crap that his marketing department spews out. There is
- > >something to be said for a positive out look, but it is another thing
- > >to deny reality.
- >
- > I don't think Bill Gates has actually looked at OS/2. If he did,
- > he might get ideas for a Real operating system!
- >
- Give from what I've heard about NT, it sounds like a version of OS/2 with
- a few extras (POSIX). Does anyone know if they did a total rewrite or if
- they are using OS/2 code like OS/2 uses Windows code?
-
- [I'm not trying to start anything, Im' just curious, especially after looking
- at some book about NT]
-
-
- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.
- . TCS Consulting Services P.O. Box 600008 St. Paul, MN 55106-0008 .
- . ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta ..!src.honeywell.com!tcscs!zeta .
- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.
-