home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:3990 comp.os.os2.misc:27407
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!njitgw.njit.edu!hertz.njit.edu!dic5340
- From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
- Subject: Re: I've seen NT......and I'll take OS/2 2.0 thanks!
- Message-ID: <1992Aug14.182354.12338@njitgw.njit.edu>
- Date: 14 Aug 92 18:23:54 GMT
- References: <1992Aug13.114605.7935@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE>
- Sender: news@njit.edu
- Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
- Lines: 21
- Nntp-Posting-Host: hertz.njit.edu
-
- In article <1992Aug13.114605.7935@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE> rommel@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Kai-Uwe Rommel) writes:
- >It would be interesting to know if this means a complete implementation
- >of the OS/2 1.x (16-bit) API or if this includes support for the 32-bit
- >OS/2 2.0 API.
- >
- >If the implement the OS/2 2.0 API, this would provide a way to make
- >powerful 32-bit applications which run on both platforms.
-
- If everyone remebers a few years ago. Some people stated that "if
- OS/2 runs Windows apps, why bother developing for OS/2 - just write
- for Windows 3.0 and get both markets".
-
- I wonder if those people will use that argument in the future when MS
- puts PM compatibility into NT. Will they then say "if NT runs OS/2
- apps, why bother developing for NT - just write for OS/2 and get both
- markets".
- --
- |) David Charlap "I don't even represent myself
- /|_ dic5340@hertz.njit.edu sometimes so NJIT is right out!.
- ((|,)
- ~|~ Hi! I am a .signature virus, copy me into your .signature file.
-