home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #19 / NN_1992_19.iso / spool / comp / os / os2 / misc / 28443 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-08-27  |  1.2 KB
  1. Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.misc:28443 comp.os.os2.advocacy:4644
  2. Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.advocacy
  3. Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bruce.cs.monash.edu.au!monu6!yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au!parry
  4. From: parry@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Tom J Parry)
  5. Subject: Re: OS/2 Win3.1 support *better* than MS!
  6. Message-ID: <1992Aug28.042134.5825@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>
  7. Originator: parry@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au
  8. Sender: news@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Usenet system)
  9. Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
  10. References: <ignacij.714930723@meishan.animal.uiuc.edu>
  11. Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 04:21:34 GMT
  12. Lines: 15
  13.  
  14. Ignacy Misztal (ignacij@meishan.animal.uiuc.edu) wrote:
  15. > Is it possible to write a large Windows application without
  16. > resorting to the enhanced mode? If so, I would suspect that many 
  17. > current Windows developers will try to make their packages run well
  18. > under the OS/2 Windows.
  19.  
  20. I would assume that if people were going to go to effort to write software
  21. to support WIN-OS/2 they would be wasting their time. Why would yuo spend
  22. time supporting a platform that is there to provide backward compatibility
  23. when you can rather produce native PM apps which would probably give you a
  24. better return for your $.
  25.  
  26. -- 
  27. Tom J Parry.
  28. Your reality is a figment of my imagination.
  29.