> Jeff Malka wrote:
>
> > > Well...maybe Linux isn't for everyone, but then no OS is for
everyone,
> > IMO. Choice is good...
> >
> > It is, but for an OS to survive it must attract and "keep" a
sufficient
> > audience, Otherwise it might have the same fate as OS/2 which is
also an
> > excellent multiuser stable OS. Do not ask why I am leaving OS/2,
because I
> > am not really, just learning a new OS and noting how it appears to a
non
> > programming guru.
>
> Well...that's a very different situation. OS/2 declined because IBM
made a
> corporate decision to stop developing and supporting it, not because
of any
> lack on its part.
OS/2 was not as hot as it could have been. I seem to recall having to
set up endless parameters in config settings for every application.
This was WAY beyond the novice.
As for the decline, I seem to recall that the next release (which would
have been FAR better) was originally a joint IBM/Micro$oft project. The
two had a problem seeing eye to eye and Micro$oft pulled out.
(Micro$oft then proceeded to remove all IBM code from OS/3, replaced it
with Micro$oft code, re-named it Win95 and the rest is history...).
There never was much support for OS/2. Comparatively few applications
were ever ported, and (compared to the competition at the time) was a
real resource hog.
Just my $0.02 (Florida residents add 6.5% Sales Tax)
Regards,
Ozz.
