Xref: utzoo comp.os.os2.misc:1171 comp.periphs.scsi:2513
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
From: lshaw@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (logan shaw)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: (Sigh) Here we go again...
Message-ID: <48256@ut-emx.uucp>
Date: 2 May 91 07:45:52 GMT
References: <980@camco.Celestial.COM> <1991May1.163339.27363@watson.ibm.com>
Sender: root@ut-emx.uucp
Reply-To: lshaw@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (logan shaw)
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.misc
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin
Lines: 76

In article <1991May1.163339.27363@watson.ibm.com> larrys@yktvmv writes:
>In <980@camco.Celestial.COM>, bill@camco.Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes:
>>I still haven't figured out why anyone would want an operating
>>system divided by 2 (OS/2).  Ignorance seems the only excuse.
>I see.
>
>I suppose you prefer the *UNI*nteresting *X*enophobic operating system,
>better known as Unix?

The problem with the name "OS/2" is that it totally reeks of IBMishness:
  - It's four characters,  (like 3090, 3278, etc),
  - It's not at all inventive, catchy, interesting, or fun.
  - It's unnecessarily UPPER CASE,
  - Science can't determine *why* it has a slash in it.  There is *no*
      *known* physical or grammatical law that indicates it needs to
      have a slash.  This strange phenomenon is also demonstrated in
      other IBM product names, like "RS/6000".

>Let's not start a religious debate with immature comments, okay Bill?
>The good and bad points of OS/2 vs. Unix has been hashed over many times,
>in many different places.
>
>...But since you started it...

Not being one who usually enjoys posting stuff that doesn't have much
to do with the group I'm in, I tried to hold back from posting this,
but in the end the pressure was too great.

...Since you continued this...

>derived from Unix, I will never program for them, either.  To answer the
>unasked question - there is and always will be a demand for an OS/2 + PM
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Oh piff.  This is the computer industry.  Even UNIX will eventually die.

>4)  It is not indeed totally incompatible with Unix, but if your clan
>would stop assuming that the universe revolves around you, then it
>wouldn't matter anyways, would it?  To clarify the "not totally
>incompatible", there are numerous TCP/IP implementations for OS/2 which
>allow NFS mouting of Unix drives, etc..

Oh boy oh boy.  I can get TCP/IP software for my Amiga too.  I guess
that means we should all be running AmigaDOS.  You know, I've heard
you can even get TCP/IP stuff for MS-DOS, and we KNOW that's not the
OS of the future (more like "OS of the past", I'd say).

>Have you ever seen two programs written by two different companies whose
>end-user-interfaces were 90% alike?

Have you ever noticed that on unix, most of the good stuff isn't
written by companies at all, but is FREE?  Hey, even the OS _itself_
is FREE in certain incarnations (ie BSD).

And finally, the major, undeniably HUGE advantage of unix...

The majority of incarnations of unix are _not_ running on INTEL
based machines!  That _alone_ should be enough to convince you
that unix is better.  :-)  :-)  :-)


	    =----DISCLAIMER---DISCLAIMER---DISCLAIMER----=
				   
	       It's finals time, and I may not be in a
		good mood.  I might even say something
	     insulting that I don't mean once in a whlie.

	    =----DISCLAIMER---DISCLAIMER---DISCLAIMER----=

Later,
  Logan
-- 
   //  # "He said that He had your number; you cut the telephone line.
 \X/   #  You said you needed a reason; He said 'there ain't much time.'
 Logan #  You kept trying to avoid it; He kept knocking on the door.
 Shaw  #  In a flash it was over; you were a prisoner of war."  -Rez Band