Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!homxb!mtuxo!mtune!rkh
From: rkh@mtune.ATT.COM (Robert Halloran)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: OS/2 and the 80286
Message-ID: <1388@mtune.ATT.COM>
Date: 6 Jan 88 16:26:34 GMT
References: <4347@garfield.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T ISL Middletown NJ USA
Lines: 26

From article <4347@garfield.UUCP>, by robert4@garfield.UUCP (Robert Pitt):
>      I am about to buy an 80286 machine but have come across a number of
> conflicting claims about the prowess of machines based on that chip.  I had
> gathered that an 80386 processor was required to run OS/2, and a number of
> salespeople I have asked are of the same understanding.  Yet Tandy -in
> several brochures- advertises its 3000HL and its "enhanced" 3000 (both 80286
> machines) as "OS/2 ready".  Does this mean that there are two kinds of 80286
> machines (with different architecture/options??), one which will run OS/2 and
> one which will not?  How can one tell, short of trying to run OS/2?  Can an
> 80286 non-compatible be upgraded to run OS/2? 

IBM, in its infinite wisdom :-), decided that since the PS/2 50 & 60 were
going to be the mainstays of their new line, and given the base of AT's
in the field, that OS/2 should be written for the '286.  There is NO 386-
specific version of OS/2 available or publicly planned, to my knowledge.

						Bob Halloran
=========================================================================
Classic UUCP: {ATT-ACC, rutgers}!mtune!rkh	DDD: (201)251-7514 
Domain-style: rkh@mtune.ATT.COM			       evenings ET
USPS: 19 Culver Ct, Old Bridge NJ 08857
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely MINE; any correlation with AT&T
	policies or positions is coincidental and unintentional.
Quote: "There were incidents & accidents, there were hints & allegations"
		-- Paul Simon
=========================================================================