Xref: utzoo comp.windows.ms:11888 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:8982
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!mcnc!rti!bcw
From: bcw@rti.rti.org (Bruce Wright)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 is here!  READ THIS, you'll be impressed
Summary: Windows not particularly modern
Message-ID: <1991Apr24.144232.14789@rti.rti.org>
Date: 24 Apr 91 14:42:32 GMT
References: <1991Apr21.135534.724@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> <1991Apr24.032647.16025@cs.mcgill.ca>
Organization: Research Triangle Institute, RTP, NC
Lines: 35

In article <1991Apr24.032647.16025@cs.mcgill.ca>, gumby@cs.mcgill.ca (Phil PRANNO) writes:
> In article <1991Apr22.043548.13530@rti.rti.org> bcw@rti.rti.org (Bruce Wright) writes:
> >Properly written communications software on a modern operating system
> >doesn't _have_ any "wait loops" in the sense of the traditional DOS
> >busy wait polling loop - it goes to sleep waiting for an event of
> 
>   Well Bruce, windows 3.0 is NOT an OS, it is a message-passing
> window manager FOR DOS!!!  By definition it is not as efficient
> as a true multitasking system.  Maybe you don't know what you're
> talking about :-)

You can (and probably should) conclude from my remark that
I don't consider Windows (even V3.0) to be a particularly
"modern" operating system (possibly not an operating system
at all, though the distinction can become somewhat philosophical
when you're talking about things that so completely change the
behavior of the underlying (overlying?) system - consider HASP 
or VM for the IBM mainframes).  Windows still betrays its roots 
from the early 80's - even then, in many respects, it wasn't 
really very sophisticated for its time.

> P.S.  Note the smiley, it is used to indicate humour, you should learn
> to use it.  Your remark in the second sentence above [deleted - bcw]
> sounds very condescending (net-etiquette is important...) 

The previous thread had struck me as rather rude, and
came from someone who has somewhat of a history of
being rude.  I was feeling somewhat annoyed at that
point and decided to be rude back ... in other words
the condescension was purely intentional.

I don't bite very often ... only when I have a specific
purpose in mind.

					Bruce C. Wright