To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
One reason OS/2 should continue to exist is educational (as the serious confusion in your above posting amply demonstrates).
So many folks who use only Windows or only Linux have no clue about the history of even relatively mainstream operating systems from the past, and they seem to think that everything out there was derived from either DOS, Windows, or UNIX.
That simply isn't true.
No, OS/2 isn't a "DOA brother of Windows NT" -- OS/2's 32-bit kernel was developed independently by IBM in the early 1990's after the split over OS/2 1.x while Cutler and friends wrote NT's new 32-bit kernel in parallel over at Microsoft.
The two are completely seperate developments, they do not share any code, and they are no more similar to each other than either one is to Linux or Solaris.
Yes, OS/2 has some level of compatibility with DOS and Windows at the API and command processor level, but it ends there.
What good is it? Try using it. Then you'll wonder why Windows and Linux are so slow on modern hardware while providing comparatively little in terms of basic desktop functionality.
Edited 2007-05-04 17:55
Well the driver is VESA compatible, with some 2D acceleation (R200).
Having a VESA compatibility mode is great if your GFX-card hasn't got accelerated driversupport.
eCS is great, McVista and Linux cannot compete with the feeling - but at the moment I haven't got the cash for upgrading to eCS 2.0 - could be interesting to see how it runs on an X2 processor







Member since:
2005-07-23
No matter what crappy colors you put there, it still looks like historical Windows 95 ... and it's year of 2007 today. VESA driver? Is it DOS based? :-)