Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!umd5!cvl!elsie!imsvax!bob
From: bob@imsvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: OS2 vs UNIX / an easy choice
Message-ID: <770@imsvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 29-Sep-87 21:51:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: imsvax.770
Posted: Tue Sep 29 21:51:17 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 2-Oct-87 06:04:38 EDT
Organization: IMS Inc., Rockville, MD
Lines: 27



Granted that 90 percent of PC/AT users have no conceivable use for multi-
tasking and would be far better off sticking with DOS than to migrate to
ANY of the new multi tasking / multi user OSs coming out, how do you choose
among the new OSs.  I've got to figure that the fact that I'm even considering
OS2 or UNIX and all the slowdowns and klunks in the night that they involve
means that I'm doing some kind of thing which is on the borderlines of 80x86
technology, and that the next logical step might be a switch over of at least
part of what I'm doing to 68020, Fairchild Clipper, or some other kind of 
hardware.  

At this point, the most important thing to consider is portability, at which
UNIX beats OS2 about as badly as the Sioux beat Custer.  I can't believe  
nobody has brought this point up in any of the recent discussions.

By the way, did anybody notice Jim Seymour's article "Corporate America is
Yawning over OS/2" in the Sept 1 issue of PC Week?  Seymour claims to have
spoken with numerous corporate representatives who have been attending IBM
and Microsoft OS2 seminars, and that the majority of them are being convinced
that IBM and Microsoft have taken leave of their senses.  Heady stuff.


Ted Holden
HT Enterprises
.
: