Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!ucbvax!hplabs!sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim
From: tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith, Knowledgian)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Unix vs. OS/2 (was RE: Pournelle on Unix)
Message-ID: <8960@ism780c.UUCP>
Date: 10 Feb 88 00:44:36 GMT
References: <11156@brl-adm.ARPA> <448@minya.UUCP> <160@teak.athertn.Atherton.COM> <4942@nsc.nsc.com> <220@edm.UUCP>
Reply-To: tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith, Knowledgian)
Organization: Suction and Pressure Lab, California Institute of Lawsonomy
Lines: 17
Keywords: My dad can lick your dad

< There are a lot of things that OS2 claims to be able to uniquely do, but here
< are a couple of things that it CAN'T do (as far as I can tell) that it seems
< UNIX CAN.
< 1) Run on a PS2/30
< 2) Run on a 386 machine IN 386 MODE.
< 3) work NOW on a '286 machine. (rather than just the command interpreter)

Yeah, well here are some things that The Exec ( that was Mattel's OS in
the Intellivision ) could do nearly a decade ago that Unix still can't do:

1) Run on a GI 1600
2) Work with only a few hundred bytes of RAM ( and no disk )
3) Asynchronous IO at the application level
-- 
Tim Smith, Knowledgian					tim@ism780c.isc.com
"Who needs sex, drugs, and rock n' roll when you've
 got Missile Command?"  -- Anon.