Xref: utzoo comp.os.msdos.misc:1967 comp.windows.ms:12385 comp.os.os2.misc:1256
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!uwm.edu!lll-winken!aunro!ersys!bking
From: ersys!bking@nro.cs.athabascau.ca (Barry King)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.windows.ms,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 is here! vs Windows 3.0 vs NeXT/MACH
Message-ID: <TN6L21w164w@ersys.uucp>
Date: 8 May 91 05:41:28 GMT
References: <12038@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems, Edmonton, AB, Canada
Lines: 29

lairdkb@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kyler Laird) writes:

> In article <-47gvh+@rpi.edu> barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd) writes
> >[...]To date I am not aware
> >of any "killer app's" uniquely suited to OS/2, that aren't available on
> >Win 3.0 (e.g. Improv on the NeXT taking advantage of OO and Mach is 
> >uniquely suited to that environment and isn't yet available on any other).
> 
> Here's one: Imara Document Retrieval System.
> 
> It uses SQL Server (networked), large file systems (HPFS, optical, ...) and
> graphics.  OS/2 seems the logical choice for something as memory intensive
> as this application.  They do not make a DOS version.
> 
> I've also heard that all of IBM's multimedia stuff runs under OS/2.
> 

IBM's Image Plus (document storage/retrieval system) runs under OS/2 
also.  Imara is therefore not a lone vendor of such a product.  
Furthermore, the IBM product makes use of optical storage attached to (of 
course) it's mainframes.
 
Personally, the killer feature of OS/2 for me is that I can 
copy/format/whatever floppy diskettes and still do simultaneous downloads 
and compiles.  Simple things for simple minds, I guess...but Windows 
can't cut it on that score.

Barry King             ersys!bking@nro.cs.athabascau.ca
Edmonton Remote Systems:  Serving Northern Alberta since 1982