🚀 go-pugleaf

for...@wwc.edu (Samuel Fortiner) writes:

>>> Yes, but OS/2 is slow and quirky, and NOWHERE near as friendly as Win95.
>>Well, at least with warp you don't have stupid resource limitations.  As 
>>for slow and quirky, do you care to back your name calling with 
>>anything?  

>I know for a fact that OS/2 on a 486/66 with 8 meg of ram swaps like hell.  
>I've waited for over 20 seconds for it to minimize a window.  Win95 on the 
>same system doesn't swap significantly, runs faster then OS/2, and is much 
>more friendly.  OS/2 also takes significant setup to run dos games in a 
>window.  Run Magic Carpet in a Win95 dos window without setting stuff up:  
>been there, done that.  Run Magic Carpet in a OS/2 window without setting 
>stuff up:  I don't think so.

OK.. I know "for a fact" that you are totally wrong. A properly tuned 
486 will rock your world.
My roommate runs a 486dx 33 with 8 MB and his system is awesome.
I just saw an indepth demonstration of WIN95 
on a P5 90 with 16 MB  and it is awesome too.

A well tuned system for EITHER operating system will run great.

Here's the facts as I see them:

	Win 95:

	advantages: fast, easy, compatible [ lets you use DOS block drivers ]
			easily organizable, intuitive interface
			On the fly video resolution change
			automatic driver support [ use dos drivers ]
			familiar  windows 3.1 ini file setup and commands 
			long file name support   
		[ I am told although my friend did not have this set up. ]
			
	disadvantages: lets you have direct port access and have
		unprotected memory space  [ can you say GPF? ]
		requires alot of ram 
		cannot multitask 16bit Windows apps
		slow dos emulation 
		is not friendly to other occupying operating systems.
		[ no boot manager or boot compliance with other managers ]
		BIOS HDD interface is slower.
		slow boot up
		

	OS/2 Warp:
	
	advantages:
			memory encapsulation, true windows multitasking,
			very fast dos emulation [ faster than real dos by
			many of my benches ]
			realistic system with 8 megs [ don't believe me? I'll
			prove you wrong ]
			highly configurable. You can make PM act almost
			exactly like Win95 if you really wanted to.
			infact much about them is really the same.
			does not waste HDD space through large cluster sizes
			[ HPFS ]
			long file name support [ HPFS ]
			faster HDD access and control for IDE, EIDE and SCSI.
			
	disadvantages:
		does not support dos block drivers
		slow bootup

		Well, I can't think of any other disadvantages right now... I 
		honestly do know that there are more.


	
They are two different operating systems with  two different types of people in 
mind.  Go look at them both, try them and see which one suits you better.
I would recommend seeing someone else's computer after they have set it up 
completely properly. Both of these operating systems are of orders
of magnitude more complex than dos and cannot be expected to perform
to their full potential "out of the box".

Run a few tests for yourself. I am biased towards OS/2 so I would ask you
to do something like this:
run a windows application, say corel draw and then
immediately right after you click on the icon go and try and 
open a dos shell or another windows
app or anything at all. In Os/2 can do this easily, while windows 95 must
wait until the application is open. That alone is enough for me to
prefer OS/2.

				--Charles Hunter