🚀 go-pugleaf

Eugen_...@mindlink.bc.ca (Eugen Woiwod) wrote:


>> Running games in a window?  That's been in OS/2 for years.


>Yeah like maybe 2 years with OS/2 2.x, and now OS/2 warp which is HIGHLY
>overated. and before that, well no one ran OS/2 v1.x anyways :-)

 Highly overrated?  I think not.  It costs less than Windows 95 will
on August 24th, it multitasks better, and runs DOS applications
better.

>> Nice to see Microsoft offering you that later this month
>> in Windows 95 (August 24, 1995).

>Yeah and it'll work better then WARP also :-) DOOM2 ran fine under WIN95(I
>tested this WITH A friend's system AND my system, SOUND and MUSIC ACTUALLY
>WORKED, not like WARP where your lucky to get SOUND fx or music, but not
>both.

You really have no idea what you're talking about.

iD has said this again and again: the sound code in DOOM is BUGGY as
hell, and it took the Microsoft programmers quite a while to kludge
around this buggy sound code so DOOM could with sound under Win95.

Under OS/2, I can run Descent with full sound, and it's FASTER than
DOS.  That's because OS/2's dos code is much faster.
  
>ONLY some part's of it are 16 bit, pretty much to maintain compatibility
>with the TON of Windows 3.0, 3.1, and DOS software out on the market. WIN95
>is more compatibile with windows & Dos programs then OS/2 WARP is anyways

  Check out Microsoft's web page.. over 600 apps are buggy under
Win95.  OS/2?  Not nearly as many.  DOS support under OS/2 nearly
flawless.  Win 3.1 support uses actual Windows code, so it is just as
solid.


>In fact, I dont think you know what your talking about :-)

Funny, that was the first impression I got when I read *YOUR* message.
;-)

>In fact it seems to me like you havent tried WIN95, or perhaps you tried
>one of the VERY early first build's of WIN95 and perhaps based your opions
>on that.

 Yep, I'm running Windows 95 right now.  I just don't like seeing FUD
spread about an excellent operating system (OS/2), and exagerrated
hype about Windows 95 (which is quite nice as well.)

>Well there's gonna be lots of WIN95 apps after this August, I can guarantee
>that, and OS/2 WARP user's are probably gonna be bitching to IBM, WE WANT
>WIN95 SUPPORT IN OS/2! Hell there's already a lot of WIN95 software

Nope.  Why use Win32 apps, when we can use OS/2 apps?  Y'know, over
8000 that are out there? (That Win95 will not beat for at least a year
or two.)

>already, just waiting to be released when WIN95 is released. And even now
>there's Netscape WIN95 beta that people can download, and also a Webpage on
>the Internet with WIN95 software.

  Wow, there's about 80 or so pages like that.  And nearly the same
amount (around 90) for OS/2 shareware.

>was VERY good in WIN95, it even ran Terminate just fine, with OS/2 you need
>to replace the communication driver to even get Terminate to work reliably,
>goes to show you IBM cant write a proper Communications driver :-) And if

  If you use DOS programs, yes, you should use the SIO drivers.  OS/2
terms (like LIvewire) work fine with the stock drivers.

>you find a game or DOS app that doesn't run under WIN95 properly(e.g say in
>full screen or in a window) then you can use MS-DOS mode, which is more
>"elegant" then using boot disks for fussy dos app's/games.

  Have you even run Warp?  Ever hear of "dual boot" which is exactly
the same as MS-DOS mode?

>Yeah with just Unix since the 60's, big whoop <g>

If it weren't for that big whoop, you wouldn't be talking on the
Internet right now. :)

Have a nice day. :)



----------------------
Stuart Charlton				Team OS/2 Member
win...@feldspar.com			Fidonet 1:224/120
Sidewinde on IRC			Pink Floyd:  Still first in space...