RE: OS/2 (was HANG time...)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pctech-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx / Tom Liotta
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 4:08 AM
>
> Dan Bale wrote:
>
> > Anyway, if that were the case, it would seem to make sense to drop OS/2.
> > New apps developed for OS/2 vs. Linux = no brainer.
>
> As long as the apps support decent, fundamental features, as OpenOffice
> has been closing in on, I less concerned by large numbers of apps.
>
> Now, if a couple OS/2 features could be implemented in Linux, I'd be
> perfectly happy with it.
>
> My #1 feature missed from OS/2 is the way 'program objects' on the
> desktop were implemented. Similar to creating a command object to prompt
> for program parms in OS/400. iSeries Access has programs such as
> lstsplf.exe that you can create shortcuts for on the Windows desktop and
> you can modify the shortcut properties to make it point to a specific
> system. But if you have two or more AS/400s, you have to create two or
> more shortcuts. An OS/2 program object could be configured to prompt you
> for "System?" and multiple prompts for multiple parms.
>
> Another feature that Windows apparently finally caught up with...
> shortcuts that don't get invalidated because the target object was moved
> to a different directory. OS/2 handled that correctly, linking the
> shortcut (shadow?) to the object identifier rather than a path. Not sure
> how Windows does it now.
>
> The good old days... sigh.
>
> Tom Liotta

OK, let me clarify...  It would make "economic" sense for IBM to drop OS/2.
The way I see it, IBM ceded OS/2 to Windows a long time ago, long before the
"official" announcment.  Of course, everyone knows OS/2 was a far superior
product.  And again, I wonder what OS/2 would be like today had IBM not
failed so miserably in marketing it. <sob>

I admit that I have not kept up with OS/2's status.  I assumed that there's
virtually no app development going on for it.  False assumption?

The good old days indeed.  I'm gonna go cry in my beer at lunch.

db