home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
- Path: sparky!uunet!destroyer!gumby!yale!spock!roland
- From: roland@spock.uucp (David A. Braun)
- Subject: Re: Why does OS/2 loose out in a PC Mag comparison test?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov10.140955.25672@spock.UUCP>
- Sender: usenet@spock.UUCP (Usenet posting daemon)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: rattle
- Organization: Choate Rosemary Hall
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 14:09:55 GMT
- Lines: 19
-
- In article <1992Nov8.182111.29298@nmt.edu> stimpy@nmt.edu (John Reynolds) writes:
- >I've never ever seen a professional unbiased review of OS/2's capabilities
- >in any of the rags. If anyone has, I'd like to know about it. OS/2 is
- >getting a bum-rap in my opinion. Most of the people that I've talked to,
- >use the rags opinion as 'the word' and won't budge until I bring them
- >over and show them what it can do (ala the 'why I love OS/2 thread').
- >
- Actually, I have read two pretty favourable reviews of OS/2 2.0, both by
- a certain Mark Minasi. See one of this year's Byte special issues,
- "Essential Guide to Windows", p. 55, "The OS/2 Alternative", and
- the September (or October) issue of Compute.
-
- ------
-
- I recall a *very* favourable article in PC/Computing in, I believe, March, just
- before 2.0 was released, which is what convinced me to get OS/2...
-
- Roland.
-
-