--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGA00014Date: 12/05/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 07:16am \/To: ABRAM HINDLE (Read 1 times) Subj: Peeve w/ Linux Abram Hindle wrote in a message to Jack Stein: AH> My main peeve about Linux is the lack of cool games and AH> retail software. Retail Software is where Win95 really JS> Your opinion isn't worth much. First, OS/2 has OS/2 JS> DOS and WIN apps all available to it, so it has MORE JS> software than all the others. Second, WIN31 is not an JS> OS by any stretch of the imagination, it is simply a JS> DOS shell. Thirdly, Linux and "Un*ix" are the same JS> platform, so rating them seperate is nonsense. AH> Judging by what your saying any OS or "shell" that can AH> emulate another has the most software? OS/2 takes the word "emulate" to a very different level than is used in other systems, such as Unix. None of the multi-tasking aspects of the OS are discarded when OS/2 is running DOS apps, and the OS remains in total control of the system. The only speed pentalty is when other tasks are running concurrently using processing time. The fact that DOS apps can be run by typing the DOS command in an OS/2 session, just as if one were in a DOS session, and DOS, OS/2 and DOS/WIN apps can all be run and viewed on the same screen muddies the water a good bit regarding "native" and non-"native" applications. AH> Is this true? I AH> realise OS/2 can run Win3.1 and DOS apps but the question do AH> you want to? Wouldn't you rather HAVE NATIVE OS/2 apps? Makes no difference to me. I have no preference between DOS and OS/2 apps at all, other than political. I personally don't like GUI shell apps, such as OS/2 PM apps and DOS WIN apps, but whether the app I'm running is DOS or OS/2 is almost never an issue to me. AH> Is there much retail software on the market for OS/2? Not AH> really. The last I remember scanning my Hobbes CD of OS/2 software I came up with something like 30,000 executibles. I don't think there is too many computing tasks that do not have an OS/2 solution. AH> That was my basis. I was mainly judging by newer AH> software and retail. By retail, I guess you mean software that can be purchased? I guess that might put a crimp in Unix, as a lot of it is freeware, including Unix itself in several of it's flavors. Newer is silly, as WIN95 is a new OS and only has "new" apps, if you call rehashed old apps "new" A LARGE number of the "new" WIn95 apps are not WIN95 apps at all, but DOS/WIN apps. AH> I bet if you took numbers Unix would be head to head with AH> DOS/Win31/95 since it's been around the longest. I should've AH> stated more clearly what my basis was. That's OK, the basis is silly anyway, because all major OS platforms have applications available that will perform most any computing task there is. AH> But if you go by the emulation (I know OS/2 does a better AH> job than that so don't flame me) or compatibility But, which OS does the "best" job is the subject of this debate area. The fact OS/2 does a better job of "emulating" DOS is an issue for this debate. How much software is available for WIN95 at Kmart is rather remote OS issue. Naturally, if an OS had little or no software, it would not be usefull to many, but that is NOT the case with any of the major OS discussed here so far, they all have tons of software available at various places. AH> You see I could count DOSEMU and Wabi for Linux or Executor AH> too.. Each OS would be looking almost the same in numbers as AH> the other. Therefore by the new 1 person opinion poll based AH> on what software an OS can technically run I shall say this: AH> WinNT/95 - 9/10 WIN95/NT cannot run any OS/2 or Unix software. AH> Win31 "Da Shell" - 6/10 (look I know there is a lot but what AH> DOS progs can it run very well and what can it emulate? Some AH> Win32 but so what?) OS/2 - 8.5/10 - Can't do Win32 very well AH> now can it? It can do WIN 32 however, how well you decided was not an issue, which is obvious when you list UNIX as DOS capable with stuff like DOSEMU. OS/2 has DOS fully integrated into the OS, it is part of OS/2, they are almost the same OS since the OS still mangages the DOS sessions entirely, the OS resources are used by the DOS session and so on. DOS apps run perfect on the HPFS file system for example. You can even run DOS shells, like WIN, right from the "emulation" same as running it in plain old DOS. AH> Linux/Unix's - 9/10 - Win3.1, DOSEMU, MAC (executor), BSD, AH> SUN OS, other stuff.. Iffy on Win31 AH> MacOS - 8/10 - I've seen this baby run dos stuff (CGA mind AH> you) and other things so it's capable. It can also run Mac AH> stuff cause it is Mac.. DOS - 8/10 - It's DOS enough said! AH> Now those numbers look unreasonable and boring. But these AH> are your numbers. Actually these are numbers for you.. I'd AH> like you to rate the OS's. I rate the OS as so: OS/2 - 10 - because it has most of the multi-tasking power and protection of UNIX, it seamlessly blends DOS, DOS/WIN, and OS/2 applications both text and GUI into one OS w/o losing it's multi-tasking abilities, Ie, it provides protection to the system while multitasking. It has a modern file system that is not limited or kludged all over the place just to get it to work. UNIX - 9 UNIX is the best for internet connections, running multi-users with total safety, easiest to maintain and cheapest to run in a large scale operation. Since these are not area's I need at home, and I am a member of the FidoNet hobby network that is mostly DOS/OS2 related, I rate UNIX below OS/2. If I ran a medium to large business, I'd rate it number one. MAC - 6 - I never used MAC, so I rate it 6th based on what Keith says about it, and knowing it is ALL GUI based, I'm not interested in it. NT - 5 - it is a GUI based networking system, what else needs to be said. DOS - 1 - it was a junk OS on the day of it's release, took much of the features of UNIX, removed them or hacked them to peices so they worked in bazarr ways, added a really screwed up file system and memory scheme, and was dropped on the unsuspecting public by IBM and it's devil child, MS. Amazingly, these two managed to force this OS on the public for going on 15 years now, and the public for the most part remains clueless lemmings with deep pockets. MS and IBM sucked BILLIONS from the public with this junk, truely amazing study of marketing, monnopoly and how competition doesn't always work well in the short term in a corrupt environmnt. DOS/WIN - for those who don't know the difference between a shell and an OS, I guess I'll mention that it is a poor attempt at getting a single tasking OS to multi-task, desqVIEW was a much better shell than WIN. I rate DV at 6, WIN at 3. AH> *** NO offense to OS/2'ers about the Windows stuff. I know AH> you can run it..*** I removed it from my system several years ago as worthless junkware. I run WIN95 at work, I can't remove it there, or I would. 9 months of running WIN95 is enough punishment for any normal human to endure. AH> Let's see if your opinion is worth more than 16000 bits... My opinion is only valuable to me. I have used and still use most of the OS listed, (except for the MAC) on a daily basis. I have loads of first hand experience to make a determinations of what *I* like and need in an OS. My needs are not the same as everyone else I guess, or everyone would be using OS/2 at home, and retail software stores would be out of business, as they sell little I really need or want. About the only "commercial" application I use is a compiler and a word processor (my wife uses the WP, not me) Everything else I use at home is freeware, shareware or homemade. Jack --- timEd/2-B11 * Origin: Jack's Free Lunch 4OS2 USR16.8 Pgh Pa (412)492-0822 (1:129/171) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGB00000Date: 12/06/97 From: MATT BEDYNEK Time: 09:14am \/To: DALE ROSS (Read 1 times) Subj: Fossile driver. * Reply to a message in muffin. Tue Dec 02 1997 23:02, Dale Ross wrote to Tarun Singh: DR> WinFOSSIL filename WNTFOS10.ZIP DR> Both products are apparently no longer being developed. If you DR> would like I can email them to you or you can FREQ them. Wonder why? Later, Matt (mbedynek@hotmail.com) --- timEd/2 1.10+ * Origin: The PostOffice - (409) 531-0067 - WHARTON, TX USA @ (1:106/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGB00001Date: 12/06/97 From: LEE ARONER Time: 06:34am \/To: ELLIOTT GOODMAN (Read 1 times) Subj: Vast Majority? EG> Hello Justin! EG> 03 Dec 97 19:57, Justin Baustert wrote to Rich Veraa: JB> As hard as Gates may try that tactic, he'll have to stop IBM and Sun JB> from writing their own Java implementations for any MS operating JB> system.. Since *both* companies have already committed to that task, JB> Gates gets Java compatibility whether he wants it or not.. EG> That's interesting, Justin, but won't MS do the same thing with that that they > did with OS/2, release a new version of WinWhatever that breaks the existing > Java implementation? All in the name of including new features, of course! Why yes, that is exactly what they will do... LRA -- SPEED 2.00 #2720: type DEL *.* for higher access --- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0 * Origin: Grey Matter * Seattle, WA * 1:343/210 * (206) 528-1941 (1:343/210) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGB00002Date: 12/06/97 From: LEE ARONER Time: 06:36am \/To: JONATHAN ROBERTS (Read 1 times) Subj: Peeve w/ Linux JR> RE: Peeve w/ Linux > BY: Jack Stein to Abram Hindle on Thu Dec 04 1997 07:27 am JR> OTE: DCTEdit v0.01 > OS/2's "emulation" of DOS is much better than any other DOS, emulated or JR> Is that true emulation though? I don't know how OS/2 works exactly, but I > thought it was built on a similar setup as DOS. Meaning that it would be not > really emulation. No? It's not emulation. OS/2 contains actual, slightly modified Windows 3.x code. IBM now owns Windows 3.1x, so they can do whatever they want with it. LRA -- SPEED 2.00 #2720: Oh, no! Not *ANOTHER* learning experience! --- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0 * Origin: Grey Matter * Seattle, WA * 1:343/210 * (206) 528-1941 (1:343/210) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGB00003Date: 12/05/97 From: JOHN GREER Time: 11:51pm \/To: ELLIOTT GOODMAN (Read 1 times) Subj: IDT WinChip C6+ CPU [From: Elliott Goodman] [To: Dave Raymond] [Subject: IDT WinChip C6+ CPU] eg> Not to mention that if MS changes the specs on their software, eg> whatever the hell it's called (drawing a blank), the chip is eg> useless for all the extra functions and it's still necessary for eg> programmers to write to the specs. That might not happen if the eg> chip isn't widely sold. Chicken and egg problem, again I guess it'll fall along the same industry acceptance as "WinPrinters" and "WinModems" do, its too bad they are put out, but a few people I hope will realize that they are hookey. --- Terminate 5.00/Pro [Boycott Microsoft!] * Origin: - [neuromancer's domain] - @ (1:3407/4) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGB00004Date: 12/06/97 From: GREG COBB Time: 09:16am \/To: JUSTIN BAUSTERT (Read 1 times) Subj: Vast Majority? Hi Justin! Friday December 05 1997, Justin Baustert babbled to Elliott Goodman: -> I suppose that is possible, but if you base things on the amount of time -> it's taking Microsoft to get Win97/98 out the door, there is a pretty ice -> lull period where developers have time to make it work.. And I'll guarantee you that regardless of whatever MS comes up with next, Java will still be moving ahead at full speed. * Origin: Picture This... Southaven, Ms (601)280-2805 - (1:123/434) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGB00005Date: 12/06/97 From: QUENN FINCH Time: 11:31am \/To: JACK STEIN (Read 1 times) Subj: Vast Majority? Jack, JS>JR> BY: Jack Stein to Jonathan Roberts on Tue Dec 02 1997 10:25 JS>JR> It screws up their plans for world domination? JS> JS>If the DOS/WIN/WIN95/WINNT stream of OS's are so wonderful, cross platform JS>applications should not hurt that goal one bit. The ironic JS>truth is that since the MS stream of OS'2 is the worst in JS>each of there fields, the ability to run any software on JS>any platform would force MS to develope a good OS or die. There is a project group on the internet are making their own Win95 clone. According to them, it will be stable than 95 and better........ One project is called freedoze98 and Hilimiton95(sp) which will be 42 bit OS. I think this is base on the Linux code. BTW, the OS will be free. ___ * UniQWK #2003* I always have fun because I'm out of my mind!!! --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGB00006Date: 12/06/97 From: QUENN FINCH Time: 12:35pm \/To: ELLIOTT GOODMAN (Read 1 times) Subj: Vast Majority? Elliott, EG>Hello Justin! EG> EG>03 Dec 97 19:57, Justin Baustert wrote to Rich Veraa: EG> EG>JB> As hard as Gates may try that tactic, he'll have to stop IBM and Sun EG>JB> from writing their own Java implementations for any MS operating EG>JB> system.. Since *both* companies have already committed to that task, EG>JB> Gates gets Java compatibility whether he wants it or not.. EG> EG>That's interesting, Justin, but won't MS do the same thing with that that EG>they did with OS/2, release a new version of WinWhatever EG>that breaks the existing Java implementation? All in the EG>name of including new features, of course! Win98 pose to be the last upgrade. So, I don't thinik MS will bother putting in a code breaker. I'm not sure about the consumer version of Windows NT that is comming out in the feature though. ___ * UniQWK #2003* Boy, am I glad it's only 1971... --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGB00007Date: 12/06/97 From: JOHN GREER Time: 07:47am \/To: JEFF DUNLOP (Read 1 times) Subj: Peeve w/ Linux [From: Jeff Dunlop] [To: Jonathan Roberts] [Subject: Peeve w/ Linux] jd> The functions are the same. Only the internal structures have been jd> changed to protect system integrity These crimes happened, Only the names of the guilty have been changed to protect the innocent. =) --- Terminate 5.00/Pro [Boycott Microsoft!] * Origin: - [neuromancer's domain] - @ (1:3407/4) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EGB00008Date: 12/06/97 From: GLENN THOMPSON Time: 03:21am \/To: ALBERT ALCOCEBA (Read 1 times) Subj: Re: To Linux or not to Linux, that's the03:21:5612/06/97 -=> Quoting Albert Alcoceba to Glenn Thompson <=- ALbert, AA> In Glenn Thompson's message to Albert Alcoceba on <26 Nov 97>, Glenn AA> Thompson said: GT> What's your problem ? GT> We got no problem with competing Operating Systems, We only have GT> a GT> problem with loud mouth Ar$^!*les who think they know better than GT> everybody else. AA> I have no problem with competing Operating Systems. I do have a AA> problem with people like you that resort to personal attacks and AA> swearing when they are shown the downsides of their Operating System AA> and can't find any way of countering them with facts. AA> Regards, Please re-read all of my message I think you may have missed something. Glenn. ... Open mouth, insert foot, echo internationally. --- Blue Wave/Max v2.30 [NR] * Origin: Ground Zero BBS - 61 8 8325 1822 SouthNet Mail Host (3:800/409)