Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think.com!mck-csc! From: pete@csc-sun.mckinsey.com (Peter Gaston) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: OS/2 is dead? Message-ID: Date: 17 Dec 90 19:14:58 GMT References: <28775@usc> <14887@ogicse.ogi.edu> <3078@canisius.UUCP> Sender: @mck-csc.mckinsey.com Organization: McKinsey & Co., Inc., Cambridge, MA Lines: 18 In-reply-to: pavlov@canisius.UUCP's message of 15 Dec 90 00:00:05 GMT Ok, there's been lots of religious ramblings against OS/2. Personally I feel that most people aren't keen for IBM for whatever reason. What I'd like to know, does anyone have a fact base pro/con for OS/2, esp. w/ regard to it's prime competitor, Unix (and future derivatives). From personal experience: - OS/2 appears slow, even on a 386 machine, but that may be more an artifact of PM and the file system - it supports both 'normal' and real-time priorities, is the real-time as useful as it claims? - writing a device driver is a bear Any comments or additions to a fact base welcome. pete gaston