Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Apr 2010 16:55 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Permalink for comment 419916
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 22:23 UTC
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
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-01-01
I've used OS/2 2.1 for about 4 years. It was great back then (1993-1997), compared to Windows NT 3.1 or Windows 3.11
Ran fine on a 486 with only 32MB RAM. Hardware support was minimal also...
My last encounter with OS/2 was actually a big let-down: eComStation 2.0 RC7 is still as low on resources as the original was, but hardware support is worse then it should be, measured by today's standards. As is the interface.
Conclusion: Don't try to revive something that is essentially dead. OS/2 is a thing of the past.
A beautiful past, that is.. But let it rest now.