home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!osr
- From: dfields@urbana.mcd.mot.com (David Fields)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.research
- Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
- Date: 14 Sep 1992 22:55:36 GMT
- Organization: Motorola, Inc. Computer Group
- Lines: 26
- Approved: comp-os-research@ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
- Message-ID: <193598INNhin@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>
- References: <18iq26INNe58@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> <18lnnmINN78b@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> <190ivbINNscq@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
- Originator: osr@ftp
-
- In article <190ivbINNscq@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, brtmac@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu (Brett McCoy) writes:
- |> When OS/2 came along it needed at a minimum, 2M of RAM, and you
- |> couldn't really do anything with less than 4M. It also needed
- |> something like 10M or 15M of disk space. At this time a typical
- |> machine as a 286 with 1M of RAM and a 40M hard drive. OS/2 just would
- |> not run on it. A system with 100M disk and 4M or more of RAM was
- |> beyond the general user.
- |>
- |> There is an add on TV right now for Best Buy selling a 486SX-20 with
- |> 4M of RAM, 100+M hard drive, SVGA, etc, for $1200. Today's average,
- |> or even below average machine can run OS/2, Windows/NT, 386BSD, Linux,
- |> or just about anything else. You may want something faster to get
- |> good performance, but at least you *can* run it enough to decide that
- |> you like it and want to get a bigger machine to run it better.
- |>
- |> This is why NT is likely to replace DOS now while OS/2 couldn't do it
- |> a couple years ago.
-
- I think you missed the part about the recommended memory size of 12Meg
- for an x86 machine and 16Meg for an R4000. Maybe this is only for the
- developers? Maybe not?
- --
- Dave Fields Motorola Computer Group dfields@urbana.mcd.mot.com
- SVR4: The Winchester Mystery Kernel uiucuxc!udc!dfields
-
-
-