Xref: utzoo comp.windows.ms:5514 comp.os.os2.misc:234
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!murdu!ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au!lu!ccmk
From: CCMK@lure.latrobe.edu.au (Mark Kosten - Computer Centre, La Trobe Uni.)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Query:  Which would you recommend?  Windows?  or OS2 w/ PM?
Message-ID: <4691@lure.latrobe.edu.au>
Date: 22 Sep 90 15:18:04 GMT
References: <4227@rex.cs.tulane.edu>
Organization: VAX Cluster, Computer Centre, La Trobe University
Lines: 26

In article <4227@rex.cs.tulane.edu>, keating@rex.cs.tulane.edu (John W. Keating) writes:
> Here's a question for the net:
> ...
> This brings up a few questions in my mind.  Why would anyone buy Windows
> when such a better alternative is available for a comparative price?
> 
> Also, why doesn't Microsoft try to push OS2 more?  I can see how they would
> be afraid to at this time, considering how Windows 3.0 has taken off, but
> why didn't they before?  And will they in the future?

Windows is a DOS program, and as such is supported on the
zillions of DOS machines out there with little trauma.  Plus, it
works with a piddly amount of memory (as little as 1MB), has
quite a large number of existing Windows programs that are
compatible with it (sort of), and the 386 mode uses the 386 to
run virtual DOS windows more effectively than OS/2 does, which 
is still a 286 program.

When OS/2 version 2.0, the 386/486 version, is released
things might move a bit more quickly.  Anyway, I hope so!

Mark Kosten,           phone: +61 3 479-2767
Computer Centre,       AARNet (internet): ccmk@lure.latrobe.edu.au
La Trobe University,   ACSnet: ccmk@lure.lat.oz.au
Bundoora, 3083         X.25 (PSI): 2347300000::ccmk
Australia