Username or EmailPassword
anyone want to still use OS/2.
Because it's fast (unlike modern Windows flavors), it has a stable desktop API (unlike modern Linux flavors), and it's relatively user-friendly.
My lord it has to be the worst piece of interface design ever thrust upon an unsuspecting computing public.
Could you be more specific? The installation program for OS/2 itself is text-mode at first and then GUI, and it's quite servicable.
The OS itself offers the WorkPlace Shell GUI which is somewhat ugly by default but easily prettied up, but which is also more flexible than most modern GUIs, and its command line is quite powerful when one realizes that Rexx permeates everything (even the GUI).
I had the misfortune of having to install OS/2 on a machine recently to test browser support for a product our company was working on and I can say without any doubt that OS/2 is down right aweful. The installation process and the usability of the interface was just horrid to say the least.
Please be specific. OS/2 has existed in some form for almost 20 years. Which version?
I am not sure why anyone in their right mind would want to still use this piece of junk when there are so many good operating system alternatives out there right now.
Because there *are* no other alternatives if one wants a lightweight, high-performance single user OS that has a decent level of DOS and Win 3.1 support and a stable native API. BeOS, Windows, Linux, and the BSDs all fail to meet the above criteria -- only OS/2 and its eComStation offspring meet those requirements.
I think the Open Source community could find better things to do than bring this zombie back to life.
Yeah, a desktop API that doesn't change drastically every 24 months would be a nice start...