On Tue, 12 Nov 2002 08:34, you wrote: > > Christopher Sawtell wrote: > > Piece of Kake under KDE, > > You gotta be joking! 23 steps! (2 steps with Windows) > > Adrian followed up with: > >I have said before here, wanna see OS/2? Get XP... > > It's what one might expect since M$ wrote OS/2. > (It was late coming out because M$ held it back while they were writing > Windows to come out first, and IBM management weren't astute enough to see > what was going on.) > > If OS/2 was so much easier to use than Linux,
Easier to use than Linux yes, but IIRC an absolute horror to set up daemons and services. > and OS/2 didn't catch on, > what hope Linux ..... OS/2 didn't catch on mainly because IBM didn't even attempt to get any mind-share in the general public. Also after it had been properly installed OS/2 "just worked" just like the electricity behind the switch, or the telephone dial-tone, so there was nothing to talk about. Linux has the advantages of cost, freedom, stability & security, and a true multi-tasking, and thus multi-user kernel. OS/2 had _none_ of those. -- Sincerely etc., Christopher Sawtell
