Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!inuxc!inuxf!matt
From: matt@inuxf.UUCP (Matt Verner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: A different View of the value of OS/2 - it's better than UNIX
Message-ID: <302@inuxf.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Sep-87 17:58:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: inuxf.302
Posted: Mon Sep 14 17:58:25 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 17-Sep-87 01:09:42 EDT
References: <494@parcvax.Xerox.COM> <961@looking.UUCP> <199@qetzal.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Consumer Products, Indianapolis
Lines: 19

In article <961@looking.UUCP>, brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
|    The biggest problem is the difficulty in administering and maintaining a
|    Unix system.  It is still orders of magnitude more difficult than the
|    "turn it on and run a program" simplicity of DOS.  Many of these problems

It seems to me that when you use the argument that Unix is big and complex (and
hard to use/admin) and DOS is simple, you are laying the base of an argument
against OS2!  OS2 is likely to require 400K of memory and be just as hard, if
not harder, to configure for the huge number of devices that are available for 
the PC/AT.  Unix is no picnic for the niave user and I truly can't see OS2 being
any better if it has half the power of Unix.


 Matt Verner   				UUCP:  ...ihnp4!inuxc!matt
 AT&T Graphics Software Labs		AT&T:  (317) 844-4364
 Indianapolis,  IN

           "The whole point of this sentence is to clearly
             explain the point this sentence is making."