Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st Jan 2008 23:33 UTC
Permalink for comment 297090
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-02
I'm not so interested in OS/2 itself-- It was a good OS, and much better than Windows 95, but still suffered from 8.3 DLL naming conventions, and the associated "DLL hell" that comes with that. The file system was much better than FAT, but NTFS (which was based on HPFS) has closed that gap. At this point, other than being a study in code optimization, OS/2 the operating system isn't that unique.
However, the Workplace Shell, which was a true, object-oriented desktop environment... That's something I'd like to see picked up by a new project. There was functionality available in WPS that no other desktop environment has touched.