Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!boingo.med.jhu.edu!haven!mimsy!mojo!SYSMGR@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: OS/2 is dead?
Message-ID: <009412E3.68BA67E0@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>
Date: 14 Dec 90 20:47:27 GMT
References: <28775@usc> <14887@ogicse.ogi.edu>,<windy.661083071@andrej>
Sender: news@eng.umd.edu (C-News)
Reply-To: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Organization: The U. of MD, CP, CAD lab
Lines: 22

In article <windy.661083071@andrej>, windy@andrej.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Andrew John Stuart Miller) writes:

>Due to networking any multitasking operating system being released
>today should also be multi-user, like Unix, Minix, OS9. As far as I
>know, OS2 is not. This means its use in networks can only be a kludge
>at best. 

Huh? Why should you want to run multiple users on a PC box? Sure, you could be
perverse and run X-terms off a '486, but why bother? Just buy a couple of '386
boxes and be ahead of the game.

You don't have to be multi-user to be in a network; just spin off network
services as a background task. 

>If only typical PC users understood.......

There's nothing "typical" in making a PC a multiuser system. You add
Unix/Xenix, plus networking or RS-232 cards. 
                          %%%%% Signature v2.0 %%%%%
 Doug Mohney, Operations Manager, CAD Lab/ME, Univ. of Maryland College Park
*   If Apple's pricing strategy had been as exciting as their commercials, *
*		Windows 3.0 would have never been written		   *