OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All - OS2

This is a discussion on OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All - OS2 ; Now running at the OS2Guy Blog: OS/2 is dead and for years I worked diligently and with devotion to help the OS/2 user move forward. From Wikipedia: "Although IBM began indicating shortly after the release of Warp 4 that OS/2 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 34

Thread: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

  1. OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    Now running at the OS2Guy Blog:

    OS/2 is dead and for years I worked diligently and with devotion to
    help the OS/2 user move forward. From Wikipedia: "Although IBM began
    indicating shortly after the release of Warp 4 that OS/2 would
    eventually be withdrawn, the company did not end support until
    2006-12-31. Sales of OS/2 stopped on 2005-12-23."

    The reality of OS/2 is that IBM owns it lock, stock and barrel and
    their decision to cease development and to stop selling it means that
    no matter who or what promises you they can extend the life and keep
    your OS/2 system viable, it simply isn't true.

    Those few people using OS/2 today (2008) are now so far behind the
    "computing norm" that they are considered relics. OS/2 users were once
    ahead of the pack and today, if they exist, are tottering along far
    back over the horizon it isn't funny.

    They are going to have to move on. To believe a third party one-man
    company is going to save their operating system is not only foolish
    but downright stupid - and I know OS/2 users are not innately stupid.
    The longer they wait to move forward the harder it is going to be.

    For me, I had to look at the options. There was Windows which was the
    natural enemy of the OS/2 user. Linux, with no corporate support to
    speak of and entirely dependent on cranks and geeks (we have enough of
    them here, MI5 is a fine example as well as Marty), and OS X. The
    latter is not only a fully certified Unix OS but it has an assured
    future and is currently beyond the scope of any other operating system
    out there and available today.

    Apple's move to Intel made OS X even more important and viable for the
    OS/2 user because it meant, with a little help from the VPC
    developers, I could still run my OS/2 apps until they either failed to
    work for me or I found an OS X equivalent. So my investment inn OS/2
    was not lost, it was carried forward with me to OS X. I also knew that
    OS X was an object oriented operating system, just like OS/2, so that
    transition over was going to be very easy whereas a Windows- centric
    user would find the transition very frustrating. Microsoft has implied
    repeatedly that Windows was object oriented but it is not by any
    means. What Windows does is fake the object oriented features.

    Within two weeks of buying a Mac the only application that I missed
    under OS/2 was a handy little program called PMView. I wrote to author
    to encourage development of a universal version of PMView for the Mac
    community because I felt it would be a profitable project and
    application. Today I don't feel that way at all. OS X comes with so
    many built-in graphical programs that edit, adjust, convert, etc., and
    does all those things so easily and intuitively that I doubt PMView
    for the Mac would be profitable.

    The future: The optical drive is on the path of the floppy. This year
    (2008) we're going to see laptops and desktops released without built-
    in DVDRW/CDRW hardware. Impossible! Can't happen! But remember -
    people said the same thing about the floppy drive and today you don't
    give floppies a second thought. The iPhone is already one such device.
    And Apple is about to announce (and compete head on with NetFlix) a
    new iTunes Movie rental business with such heavy hitters as 20th
    Century Fox, Disney, Paramount, Sony, Miramax and a slew of
    independent movie distributors. The same day a movie is released to
    theaters you'll be able to download it directly to your computing
    device (iPod, iPhone, iMac, Mac Book, Mac Pro, AppleTV) and watch it
    as many times as you want over a 24 hour period.

    Apple will probably announce an "ultra" thin laptop on January 15th at
    MacWorld. It won't have an optical drive per se but they'll offer the
    option of adding an external that can be connected via USB. The hard
    drive will be replaced with a flash drive(s). Replace the standard
    hard drive and remove the internal optical drive and you're going to
    see a very thin laptop more powerful then anything on the market
    today, equipped with Penryn dual core Intel chips, 802.11n (high
    speed) WiFi, BlueTooth, paper thin-backlit displays and more. You
    won't stick a stack of DVDs in your luggage when you travel, you'll
    load up your keychain ThumbDrive with all of your favorite programs,
    TV Shows, and movies and plug them into your Ultra-Thin MacBook's USB
    port.

    So do you see where computing is going? OS/2 will never be able to go
    there no matter what a minor one-man company tells you. The longer the
    OS/2 users keep their heads buried the more frustrated and
    disillusioned they are going to be.

    The best advice I can give to *all* former and current OS/2 users is
    to accept the fate of OS/2 and commit yourself to another OS.
    Preferably OS X.

    Dr. Tim Martin, The OS/2 Guy
    Visit The OS/2 Guy Blog Today
    http://www.os2guy.com

  2. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    The only sad thing here is the fact that you take time out of your day
    to be a usenet troll.



  3. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    On Jan 3, 10:38*am, " The OS/2 Guy " wrote:
    > Those few people using OS/2 today (2008) are now so far behind the
    > "computing norm" that they are considered relics. OS/2 users were once
    > ahead of the pack and today, if they exist, are tottering along far
    > back over the horizon it isn't funny.


    This is actually kind of true. I have talked to some OS/2 users that
    really seem to have missed the whole technology thing for the last few
    years, and believe they still live in that 1997 where Windows crashes
    constantly, it's not stable, the apps it has (ie. Office) are not
    important, and OS/2 can still do "everything" for them. I talked to
    one guy on IRC that still uses Lotus Smartsuite 1.7 for OS/2, and I
    mean "uses it normally." Aside from the horrendous non-antialiased
    fonts and the general oldness of the app, I have no idea how this
    person could work with modern Word 2003+ document types. My mention
    of this irritated him to where he told me everyone should just use
    RTF. Sorry, my bosses wouldn't really react well if I told them how
    to save documents. Another guy I talked to said he hasn't used
    Windows since Win2K and still has a Win2K box he "occasionally" uses.
    He bases his idea of what Windows in 2007-2008 is based on this
    machine.

    We moved on. We really did. OS/2 is a cute toy to play with in a VM
    and be impressed when Seamonkey and Firefox are updated for it and
    work. That's really all I can do with it.

    > people said the same thing about the floppy drive and today you don't
    > give floppies a second thought. The iPhone is already one such device.


    One stupid irony is that for as future-tech as the iPhone seems, the
    fact that it can't work with 64-bit Windows clients is pretty sad and
    not forward-thinking. In fact aside from my Hackintosh install I
    can't use a new i-anything because it won't work with any of my
    clients.

  4. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    S.SubZero, your IP ( 205.248.102.83 ) traces you back at Microsoft Corp. in
    California, San Jose. Maybe that's the reason why you don't understand OS/2
    users' motives?

    S.SubZero wrote:
    > On Jan 3, 10:38 am, " The OS/2 Guy " wrote:
    >> Those few people using OS/2 today (2008) are now so far behind the
    >> "computing norm" that they are considered relics. OS/2 users were
    >> once ahead of the pack and today, if they exist, are tottering along
    >> far back over the horizon it isn't funny.

    >
    > This is actually kind of true. I have talked to some OS/2 users that
    > really seem to have missed the whole technology thing for the last few
    > years, and believe they still live in that 1997 where Windows crashes
    > constantly, it's not stable, the apps it has (ie. Office) are not
    > important, and OS/2 can still do "everything" for them.


    Not everyone thinks alike. The majority of OS/2 don't think so. There are
    some who still believe Windows is unstable, but these are also Linux, Mac
    and Unix users who think the same. To me, Windows XP SP2 works very good. I
    don't know about Vista, I've never used it.

    > I talked to
    > one guy on IRC that still uses Lotus Smartsuite 1.7 for OS/2, and I
    > mean "uses it normally." Aside from the horrendous non-antialiased
    > fonts and the general oldness of the app, I have no idea how this
    > person could work with modern Word 2003+ document types. My mention


    Probably he doesn't need to work with Word 2003+ documents. I use LSS 1.7 at
    the Office. We care about getting our job done, not the eye-candy. The
    anti-aliasing thing is certainly painful at times, but you can use
    OpenOffice if you can't live with it.

    > of this irritated him to where he told me everyone should just use
    > RTF. Sorry, my bosses wouldn't really react well if I told them how
    > to save documents. Another guy I talked to said he hasn't used
    > Windows since Win2K and still has a Win2K box he "occasionally" uses.
    > He bases his idea of what Windows in 2007-2008 is based on this
    > machine.


    You should choose your company better. If you talk with bozos, you get
    moronic comments and replies. As I said, not all OS/2 users are alike and
    generalization is stupid.

    > We moved on. We really did. OS/2 is a cute toy to play with in a VM
    > and be impressed when Seamonkey and Firefox are updated for it and
    > work. That's really all I can do with it.


    Good for you - the question is why you still read this newsgroup if you've
    moved on, then. Other people are using OS/2 quite regurarly or sporadically
    without much hassle or problems. It's all down to what you use your computer
    for. Each one of us has different priorities and goals. Again,
    generalization is not bright.

    >> people said the same thing about the floppy drive and today you don't
    >> give floppies a second thought. The iPhone is already one such
    >> device.

    >
    > One stupid irony is that for as future-tech as the iPhone seems, the
    > fact that it can't work with 64-bit Windows clients is pretty sad and
    > not forward-thinking. In fact aside from my Hackintosh install I
    > can't use a new i-anything because it won't work with any of my
    > clients.


    Incompatibiliy with Wintel is how Apple stood afloat for many years. They
    want you to use Macs, not PCs - and can you blame them? They obviously push
    their own product...

    Riccardo




  5. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    S.SubZero wrote:
    > On Jan 3, 10:38 am, " The OS/2 Guy " wrote:
    >> Those few people using OS/2 today (2008) are now so far behind the
    >> "computing norm" that they are considered relics. OS/2 users were once
    >> ahead of the pack and today, if they exist, are tottering along far
    >> back over the horizon it isn't funny.

    >
    > This is actually kind of true. I have talked to some OS/2 users that
    > really seem to have missed the whole technology thing for the last few
    > years, and believe they still live in that 1997 where Windows crashes
    > constantly, it's not stable, the apps it has (ie. Office) are not
    > important, and OS/2 can still do "everything" for them.


    One might expect that OS/2 is way out of date for 'modern' use but I
    haven't yet found that to be true. I also have Windows XP and Office
    2003 with all of the latest fixes, updates, and patches but I use them
    very rarely, not because of any antipathy towards Microsoft or Windows,
    but just because I personally find OS/2 to be much more pleasant to use
    on a daily basis. I have not yet seen any compelling reason to upgrade
    to Vista and Office 2007 but I would do it if it was necessary. I
    haven't missed any 'technology thing' and I expect that my computer
    hardware and software is comparable in power and capability to, or
    better than, whatever either you or the average Windows XP or Vista user
    might be using.

    > I talked to
    > one guy on IRC that still uses Lotus Smartsuite 1.7 for OS/2, and I
    > mean "uses it normally." Aside from the horrendous non-antialiased
    > fonts and the general oldness of the app, I have no idea how this
    > person could work with modern Word 2003+ document types. My mention
    > of this irritated him to where he told me everyone should just use
    > RTF. Sorry, my bosses wouldn't really react well if I told them how
    > to save documents. Another guy I talked to said he hasn't used
    > Windows since Win2K and still has a Win2K box he "occasionally" uses.
    > He bases his idea of what Windows in 2007-2008 is based on this
    > machine.


    Your point of view here sounds as if it's from 1997 or so. People on
    non-Windows platforms such as Linux, OS2, and Mac still widely use
    Office document formats but they are slowly being replaced with the Open
    Document formats. My personal reason for doing that is so that I can
    still read documents created now in 10 or 20 years when whatever version
    of Office that might be in use may not support the older Office formats
    that the documents were created in. Also, I have documents created in
    software that preceded Microsoft Word and Office that has long since
    been forgotten, even by me, but I still want to read the documents so I
    have learned to pay attention to the document format. I don't think that
    the Office formats are stable enough on a long-term basis to rely on for
    archiving. Here is a link to the wikipedia on open document formats:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument

    You should give these document formats some serious consideration even
    if you normally use Office formats.

    >
    > We moved on. We really did. OS/2 is a cute toy to play with in a VM
    > and be impressed when Seamonkey and Firefox are updated for it and
    > work. That's really all I can do with it.
    >


    Windows has always seemed more toylike than OS/2. OS/2 doesn't have
    very good hardware or software support anymore but if you find
    compatible hardware to run it on, it is a very capable platform for
    everyday use and certainly not 'toylike.'

    --
    Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
    and Sea Monkey 1.5a

  6. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    On Jan 4, 8:14 am, "Riccardo Rubini" wrote:
    > S.SubZero, your IP


    Snooping is cute and all, and publically posting it is even cuter, but
    I don't need to go to that low of a level.

    Where I work is not important. I'm still a user. I still go home and
    use an OS. Heck, I go home and I have an option to use all kinds of
    OSs, most of them not Windows. But Windows is what I end up in,
    because it is the OS that gives me the best flexibility with my
    activities as well as external things like web browsing. The web has
    moved considerably beyond what OS/2 is capable of.


    > Not everyone thinks alike. The majority of OS/2 don't think so. There are
    > some who still believe Windows is unstable, but these are also Linux, Mac
    > and Unix users who think the same. To me, Windows XP SP2 works very good. I
    > don't know about Vista, I've never used it.


    The problem is they don't know that they don't know. These people
    installed Windows once, years ago, on half-working hardware, had it
    crash, and instantly proclaimed Windows was junk and ran back to their
    spiffy OS/2 boxes and never looked back, while the rest of us all
    looked forward. As for Vista, while it's hardly perfect, it is pretty
    good, and the vast majority of people whining about it have never used
    it, they just read a website mentioning DRM in some way and OMG VISTA
    SUX IT WON'T PLAY MP3S AND VIDEOS without ANY research. Note that OS/
    2 by default can't play mp3's at all and barely does any video even
    with GUI-less open source bare-bones media players. I ran Vista x64
    on my laptop for several months and every MP3 and video I played
    worked. Every one of them. And Vista x64 never crashed. It ran very
    reliably and I'd still be using it if it wasn't for the heavy resource
    demands.

    Linux and Mac users have their own weird hypocrisy going, because
    while they yell and scream about Windows being junk, they are the ones
    scrambling for the latest version of Wine and the latest Boot Camp.
    So I don't pay much attention to them.

    > Probably he doesn't need to work with Word 2003+ documents. I use LSS 1.7 at
    > the Office. We care about getting our job done, not the eye-candy. The
    > anti-aliasing thing is certainly painful at times, but you can use
    > OpenOffice if you can't live with it.


    The day a potential customer sends over the proposal in a .docx
    format, what are you going to do? Heck, I tried SS1.7 in OS/2 and my
    Word 2003-designed resume was missing formatting to the point where I
    couldn't fix it up. OpenOffice could open it, but since OpenOffice
    for OS/2 is a pay product (which I find ironic, they could at least
    change the name), and they don't even have a current version, I
    decided not to bother. They have the latest OpenOffice for OS X and
    Linux for free. They are up to 2.3, ya know!?

    >
    > You should choose your company better. If you talk with bozos, you get
    > moronic comments and replies. As I said, not all OS/2 users are alike and
    > generalization is stupid.


    I've worked with Word exclusively for years. I even used it at a co-
    location facility hosting Linux machines. The owner was a Linux-head,
    but understood that the vast majority of his customers used Office to
    do their documents and whatever, and when they came to us, we had to
    be able to read them properly, and be able to respond with a document
    that would format 100% properly for them.

    If you're still using OS/2 in a production environment, as a
    workstation, you are in a very, very small minority. The minority
    that ends up in comp.os.os2.misc.

    >
    > Good for you - the question is why you still read this newsgroup if you've
    > moved on, then. Other people are using OS/2 quite regurarly or sporadically
    > without much hassle or problems. It's all down to what you use your computer
    > for. Each one of us has different priorities and goals. Again,
    > generalization is not bright.


    I visit here because I have been tinkering with OS/2 in a virtual
    machine and as I've been out of the loop for about a decade I like to
    pop in and catch up.


    > Incompatibiliy with Wintel is how Apple stood afloat for many years. They
    > want you to use Macs, not PCs - and can you blame them? They obviously push
    > their own product...


    http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/bootcamp.html

    Breaking the iphone and new ipod so they can't talk to 64-bit Windows
    clients isn't the way to sell iphones and new ipods. I was looking at
    the Touch and they are kinda neat, but since I don't have any 32-bit
    Windows client I can't interface with it, so that's a Touch that won't
    be sold.


  7. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    In <3e959665-daad-4732-8cde-3b02c39ea561@21g2000hsj.googlegroups.com>, on
    01/04/2008
    at 07:56 AM, "S.SubZero" said:



    >On Jan 3, 10:38*am, " The OS/2 Guy " wrote: > Those
    >few people using OS/2 today (2008) are now so far behind the > "computing
    >norm" that they are considered relics. OS/2 users were once > ahead of
    >the pack and today, if they exist, are tottering along far > back over
    >the horizon it isn't funny.


    >This is actually kind of true. I have talked to some OS/2 users that
    >really seem to have missed the whole technology thing for the last few
    >years, and believe they still live in that 1997 where Windows crashes
    >constantly, it's not stable, the apps it has (ie. Office) are not
    >important, and OS/2 can still do "everything" for them. I talked to one
    >guy on IRC that still uses Lotus Smartsuite 1.7 for OS/2, and I mean
    >"uses it normally." Aside from the horrendous non-antialiased fonts and
    >the general oldness of the app, I have no idea how this person could work
    >with modern Word 2003+ document types.


    That is simple; you open them in Smartsuit 1.7 with the latest fixpack.
    Now go troll some place else.










    My mention of this irritated him
    >to where he told me everyone should just use RTF. Sorry, my bosses
    >wouldn't really react well if I told them how to save documents. Another
    >guy I talked to said he hasn't used Windows since Win2K and still has a
    >Win2K box he "occasionally" uses. He bases his idea of what Windows in
    >2007-2008 is based on this machine.


    >We moved on. We really did. OS/2 is a cute toy to play with in a VM and
    >be impressed when Seamonkey and Firefox are updated for it and work.
    >That's really all I can do with it.


    >> people said the same thing about the floppy drive and today you don't
    >> give floppies a second thought. The iPhone is already one such device.


    >One stupid irony is that for as future-tech as the iPhone seems, the fact
    >that it can't work with 64-bit Windows clients is pretty sad and not
    >forward-thinking. In fact aside from my Hackintosh install I can't use a
    >new i-anything because it won't work with any of my clients.



  8. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    On Jan 4, 9:27 am, Gnak2POMD...@nospam.net wrote:
    >
    > That is simple; you open them in Smartsuit 1.7 with the latest fixpack.
    > Now go troll some place else.


    IBM's own website mentions nothing of Office 2003.

    http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview...id=swg21159766

    In fact..

    "Note that there is not a 1:1 correspondence for all features in
    Microsoft Office and Lotus SmartSuite, so 100% functionality cannot be
    achieved."

    That's with Office 2000. Not that it matters much, since IBM has no
    facility on their site I can find to either buy SS/2, nor any link to
    any resellers that do. They only mention the Windows version. Which
    is over *8* versions ahead of SS/2, by the way.

    OS/2 is brutally limited. I mean for someone who's always used it,
    they may not even notice. I know for me personally, I could *never*
    sit at a PC for any length of time using only OS/2. I'd go crazy.
    There's too many things I like to do that OS/2 either can't do or does
    with limitations. If I was a simple worker in a box with no emotion
    and simply punched numbers and letters all day, maybe I wouldn't have
    a problem with it. I'm not one of those people. I like to watch
    videos, listen to music, play games, and enjoy my experience. Heck,
    just using OS/2 in a VM it gets boring. OS/2 users don't know
    though. They don't see it. They see OS/2, and their tunnel vision
    just sees it and nothing else. There is a broader spectrum of things
    out there, things that don't rely on odd CLI linux ports and reliance
    on old versions of Java.

    Even the Linux developers learned that just having a cool web server
    doesn't make people want to use the OS. What desktop Linux doesn't
    come with a facility for playing videos and music, and some kind of
    Realplayer-type thing? Linux even has a current version of Flash that
    can play content on *any* website, not just ones that are tricked by a
    hacked plugin.

    At least it's not BeOS. I think the lone guy handling the Seamonkey
    ports in Russia closed down, his site dropped off the 'net the other
    day.

  9. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    S.SubZero wrote:

    >
    > OS/2 is brutally limited. I mean for someone who's always used it,
    > they may not even notice. I know for me personally, I could *never*
    > sit at a PC for any length of time using only OS/2. I'd go crazy.


    That's fine...but no one cares, here or anywhere else, if you like OS/2
    or not. Frankly, you're at least a little bit crazy to be posting here
    with your goofy don't-like-it message about now-obscure system software
    that has a miniscule user base and is no longer sold. Why not go on
    over to the BeOS newsgroup and tell them what you think about that?

    > There's too many things I like to do...


    Go do some of them then.

    --
    Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
    and Sea Monkey 1.5a

  10. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    S.SubZero wrote:

    >
    > Where I work is not important. I'm still a user. I still go home and
    > use an OS. Heck, I go home and I have an option to use all kinds of
    > OSs, most of them not Windows. But Windows is what I end up in,
    > because it is the OS that gives me the best flexibility with my
    > activities as well as external things like web browsing. The web has
    > moved considerably beyond what OS/2 is capable of.


    I see you don't want to talk about Open Document formats or OS/2
    capabilities. You just want to troll about Windows. So be it. Windows
    is off-topic for this newsgroup. Please respect the newsgroups and post
    appropriately.

    --
    Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
    and Sea Monkey 1.5a

  11. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All



    You're driveling subzero (a good name for you). You told us you're an MS
    employee. I figure you must be a mail clerk or something minor, because
    the Lotus announcement mentions Word XP; that is word 2002/2003. I open
    those documents.

    Now run along and troll somewhere else.

    PS: No one has ever created a website where the data was enhanced with
    flash anything. However, there are many websites created by idiots who
    lose sales by annoying people flash nonsense.








    In <037d6d38-5c38-4664-a217-2cdf82b2e45d@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, on
    01/04/2008
    at 12:50 PM, "S.Subzero" said:



    >On Jan 4, 9:27 am, Gnak2POMD...@nospam.net wrote:
    >>
    >> That is simple; you open them in Smartsuit 1.7 with the latest fixpack.
    >> Now go troll some place else.


    >IBM's own website mentions nothing of Office 2003.


    >http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview...id=swg21159766


    >In fact..


    >"Note that there is not a 1:1 correspondence for all features in
    >Microsoft Office and Lotus SmartSuite, so 100% functionality cannot be
    >achieved."


    >That's with Office 2000. Not that it matters much, since IBM has no
    >facility on their site I can find to either buy SS/2, nor any link to any
    >resellers that do. They only mention the Windows version. Which is over
    >*8* versions ahead of SS/2, by the way.


    >OS/2 is brutally limited. I mean for someone who's always used it, they
    >may not even notice. I know for me personally, I could *never* sit at a
    >PC for any length of time using only OS/2. I'd go crazy. There's too
    >many things I like to do that OS/2 either can't do or does with
    >limitations. If I was a simple worker in a box with no emotion and
    >simply punched numbers and letters all day, maybe I wouldn't have a
    >problem with it. I'm not one of those people. I like to watch videos,
    >listen to music, play games, and enjoy my experience. Heck, just using
    >OS/2 in a VM it gets boring. OS/2 users don't know though. They don't
    >see it. They see OS/2, and their tunnel vision just sees it and nothing
    >else. There is a broader spectrum of things out there, things that don't
    >rely on odd CLI linux ports and reliance on old versions of Java.


    >Even the Linux developers learned that just having a cool web server
    >doesn't make people want to use the OS. What desktop Linux doesn't come
    >with a facility for playing videos and music, and some kind of
    >Realplayer-type thing? Linux even has a current version of Flash that
    >can play content on *any* website, not just ones that are tricked by a
    >hacked plugin.


    >At least it's not BeOS. I think the lone guy handling the Seamonkey
    >ports in Russia closed down, his site dropped off the 'net the other day.



  12. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    S.SubZero wrote:
    > On Jan 4, 9:27 am, Gnak2POMD...@nospam.net wrote:
    >>
    >> That is simple; you open them in Smartsuit 1.7 with the latest
    >> fixpack. Now go troll some place else.

    >
    > IBM's own website mentions nothing of Office 2003.


    IBM is not the right source for OS/2 news. Last update to Lotus SmartSuite
    for OS/2 dates July, 2007.

    http://www.os2world.com/content/view/14866/2/

    Yep. Office 2003 is supported.

    > http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview...id=swg21159766
    >
    > In fact..
    >
    > "Note that there is not a 1:1 correspondence for all features in
    > Microsoft Office and Lotus SmartSuite, so 100% functionality cannot be
    > achieved."


    That document is old ( 2005 or prior to that ). Then, IBM and Lotus released
    several bugfixes and add-ons via fixpaks to the product. As I told you, they
    are available to eCS customers for free on the ecomstation.com portal or via
    IBM / Lotus somehow - don't ask me how because I don't have a Passport
    Advantage subscription with them.

    > That's with Office 2000. Not that it matters much, since IBM has no
    > facility on their site I can find to either buy SS/2, nor any link to
    > any resellers that do. They only mention the Windows version. Which
    > is over *8* versions ahead of SS/2, by the way.


    You didn't do well your homeworks, my man. Here's the link:

    http://www-306.ibm.com/software/lotu...suite/os2.html

    You should call IBM and give them priority code 104CBW74. However, I suggest
    you to buy eComstation 1.2 : you'll get Lotus Smartsuite and an updated
    version of OS/2, with a giant bundle of software, at a bargain price. Odds
    are if you buy LSS from IBM it will cost you more than the eCS bundle. Of
    course, you are also entitled to OS/2 Warp 4.52 ( CP2 ) media if you buy
    eCS. You can't get those from IBM anymore. After your company ( Microsoft )
    gave them 800 million to settle long standing "differences", IBM
    discountinued OS/2.

    > OS/2 is brutally limited. I mean for someone who's always used it,
    > they may not even notice. I know for me personally, I could *never*
    > sit at a PC for any length of time using only OS/2. I'd go crazy.


    That's your problem, really. I have never experienced such issue. Once you
    do a good OS/2 setup, all is fine. You have to know how to use it. The
    average Windows user of course would probably get crazy configuring it, kids
    nowadays don't have the skills to accomplish such "tough" task. But back in
    the day it was normal to.

    > There's too many things I like to do that OS/2 either can't do or does
    > with limitations.


    Then don't use it. Nobody forces you and your boss ( Bill Gates ) would
    probably fire you if he were to notice it. He was very mad and jealous about
    OS/2 running Windows/DOS programs better than Windows - as testified on some
    letters of his to his staff, leaked during one of the many Microsoft
    antitrust legal bouts.

    > If I was a simple worker in a box with no emotion
    > and simply punched numbers and letters all day, maybe I wouldn't have
    > a problem with it. I'm not one of those people. I like to watch
    > videos, listen to music, play games, and enjoy my experience. Heck,


    Well, on the other hand, I tell you a typical Windows at the Office
    scenario:

    Employees watching YouTube all day long, listening to Music, watching pr0n
    and getting dialers, worms and virii, burning DVD's, wasting bandwidth and
    time. This is what happened when I had a Windows machine at the Office. I
    was running Norton Antivirus daily and still I couldn't keep it clean.
    Spyware was also a constant plague.When OS/2 came back into the picture, the
    employees were crazy, but, finally, they did the work they were paid for:
    scanning documents, writing letters, using e-mail - all of this without me
    ever caring about virii and other security which is essential using Windows.
    I haven't had to reinstall OS/2 in over three years. With Windows, I was
    forced to run Norton Ghost and restore an image every once and then over a
    month period...

    > just using OS/2 in a VM it gets boring. OS/2 users don't know
    > though. They don't see it. They see OS/2, and their tunnel vision
    > just sees it and nothing else. There is a broader spectrum of things
    > out there, things that don't rely on odd CLI linux ports and reliance
    > on old versions of Java.


    I've always hated Java. So I don't see a problem. But I begin to think your
    job here is trolling. And I am getting bored.

    > Even the Linux developers learned that just having a cool web server
    > doesn't make people want to use the OS. What desktop Linux doesn't
    > come with a facility for playing videos and music, and some kind of
    > Realplayer-type thing? Linux even has a current version of Flash that
    > can play content on *any* website, not just ones that are tricked by a
    > hacked plugin.


    The powers that being don't allow or have no interest in having a good Flash
    plugin for OS/2 - and what are you gonna do about it? To me, that's good: my
    employees won't waste time watching YouTube while I am not around. Flash is
    not essential and for some time I haven't installed it on purpose on my
    Windows machine either.

    > At least it's not BeOS. I think the lone guy handling the Seamonkey
    > ports in Russia closed down, his site dropped off the 'net the other
    > day.


    I used BeOS back in the day and it was a fine good OS for those times. Such
    a pity the company you work for gave its best effort to make it fail
    miserably.

    Riccardo



  13. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All


    You have just proven you are an ecs troll and shill -- just like I said.






    In <477eadfe$0$10627$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it>, on 01/04/2008
    at 11:06 PM, "Riccardo Rubini" said:



    >S.SubZero wrote:
    >> On Jan 4, 9:27 am, Gnak2POMD...@nospam.net wrote:
    >>>
    >>> That is simple; you open them in Smartsuit 1.7 with the latest
    >>> fixpack. Now go troll some place else.

    >>
    >> IBM's own website mentions nothing of Office 2003.


    >IBM is not the right source for OS/2 news. Last update to Lotus
    >SmartSuite for OS/2 dates July, 2007.


    >http://www.os2world.com/content/view/14866/2/


    >Yep. Office 2003 is supported.


    >> http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview...id=swg21159766
    >>
    >> In fact..
    >>
    >> "Note that there is not a 1:1 correspondence for all features in
    >> Microsoft Office and Lotus SmartSuite, so 100% functionality cannot be
    >> achieved."


    >That document is old ( 2005 or prior to that ). Then, IBM and Lotus
    >released several bugfixes and add-ons via fixpaks to the product. As I
    >told you, they are available to eCS customers for free on the
    >ecomstation.com portal or via IBM / Lotus somehow - don't ask me how
    >because I don't have a Passport Advantage subscription with them.


    >> That's with Office 2000. Not that it matters much, since IBM has no
    >> facility on their site I can find to either buy SS/2, nor any link to
    >> any resellers that do. They only mention the Windows version. Which
    >> is over *8* versions ahead of SS/2, by the way.


    >You didn't do well your homeworks, my man. Here's the link:


    >http://www-306.ibm.com/software/lotu...suite/os2.html


    >You should call IBM and give them priority code 104CBW74. However, I
    >suggest you to buy eComstation 1.2 : you'll get Lotus Smartsuite and an
    >updated version of OS/2, with a giant bundle of software, at a bargain
    >price. Odds are if you buy LSS from IBM it will cost you more than the
    >eCS bundle. Of course, you are also entitled to OS/2 Warp 4.52 ( CP2 )
    >media if you buy eCS. You can't get those from IBM anymore. After your
    >company ( Microsoft ) gave them 800 million to settle long standing
    >"differences", IBM discountinued OS/2.


    >> OS/2 is brutally limited. I mean for someone who's always used it,
    >> they may not even notice. I know for me personally, I could *never*
    >> sit at a PC for any length of time using only OS/2. I'd go crazy.


    >That's your problem, really. I have never experienced such issue. Once
    >you do a good OS/2 setup, all is fine. You have to know how to use it.
    >The average Windows user of course would probably get crazy configuring
    >it, kids nowadays don't have the skills to accomplish such "tough" task.
    >But back in the day it was normal to.


    >> There's too many things I like to do that OS/2 either can't do or does
    >> with limitations.


    >Then don't use it. Nobody forces you and your boss ( Bill Gates ) would
    >probably fire you if he were to notice it. He was very mad and jealous
    >about OS/2 running Windows/DOS programs better than Windows - as
    >testified on some letters of his to his staff, leaked during one of the
    >many Microsoft antitrust legal bouts.


    >> If I was a simple worker in a box with no emotion
    >> and simply punched numbers and letters all day, maybe I wouldn't have
    >> a problem with it. I'm not one of those people. I like to watch
    >> videos, listen to music, play games, and enjoy my experience. Heck,


    >Well, on the other hand, I tell you a typical Windows at the Office
    >scenario:


    >Employees watching YouTube all day long, listening to Music, watching
    >pr0n and getting dialers, worms and virii, burning DVD's, wasting
    >bandwidth and time. This is what happened when I had a Windows machine
    >at the Office. I was running Norton Antivirus daily and still I couldn't
    >keep it clean. Spyware was also a constant plague.When OS/2 came back
    >into the picture, the employees were crazy, but, finally, they did the
    >work they were paid for: scanning documents, writing letters, using
    >e-mail - all of this without me ever caring about virii and other
    >security which is essential using Windows. I haven't had to reinstall
    >OS/2 in over three years. With Windows, I was forced to run Norton Ghost
    >and restore an image every once and then over a month period...


    >> just using OS/2 in a VM it gets boring. OS/2 users don't know
    >> though. They don't see it. They see OS/2, and their tunnel vision
    >> just sees it and nothing else. There is a broader spectrum of things
    >> out there, things that don't rely on odd CLI linux ports and reliance
    >> on old versions of Java.


    >I've always hated Java. So I don't see a problem. But I begin to think
    >your job here is trolling. And I am getting bored.


    >> Even the Linux developers learned that just having a cool web server
    >> doesn't make people want to use the OS. What desktop Linux doesn't
    >> come with a facility for playing videos and music, and some kind of
    >> Realplayer-type thing? Linux even has a current version of Flash that
    >> can play content on *any* website, not just ones that are tricked by a
    >> hacked plugin.


    >The powers that being don't allow or have no interest in having a good
    >Flash plugin for OS/2 - and what are you gonna do about it? To me,
    >that's good: my employees won't waste time watching YouTube while I am
    >not around. Flash is not essential and for some time I haven't installed
    >it on purpose on my Windows machine either.


    >> At least it's not BeOS. I think the lone guy handling the Seamonkey
    >> ports in Russia closed down, his site dropped off the 'net the other
    >> day.


    >I used BeOS back in the day and it was a fine good OS for those times.
    >Such a pity the company you work for gave its best effort to make it
    >fail miserably.


    >Riccardo





  14. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    Gnak2POMD562@nospam.net wrote:
    > You have just proven you are an ecs troll and shill -- just like I
    > said.


    And you keep proving you are a coward and a liar avoiding the big question:
    if you're not Tim Martin, who you are?

    No matter how much you play the defender of OS/2 against poor SubZero.
    Nobody is buying your game. You still are a Tim Martin's subproduct and
    sockpuppet. Everybody sees that, despite your pitiful disguise.

    Now run, "junior".




  15. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All



    Run along junior. You're getting repetitive and boring. Like idiots always
    are.





    In <477eb312$0$10628$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it>, on 01/04/2008
    at 11:28 PM, "Riccardo Rubini" said:



    >Gnak2POMD562@nospam.net wrote:
    >> You have just proven you are an ecs troll and shill -- just like I
    >> said.


    >And you keep proving you are a coward and a liar avoiding the big
    >question: if you're not Tim Martin, who you are?


    >No matter how much you play the defender of OS/2 against poor SubZero.
    >Nobody is buying your game. You still are a Tim Martin's subproduct and
    >sockpuppet. Everybody sees that, despite your pitiful disguise.


    >Now run, "junior".






  16. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    Gnak2POMD562@nospam.net wrote:
    > Run along junior. You're getting repetitive and boring. Like idiots
    > always are.


    Cut the "junior" short and tell us who you are coward. You're the only one
    repetitive here. Tell us who you are, if you have a fraction of balls like
    the grown up man you claim to be, either **** off. You have no credibility,
    coward.



  17. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All



    You want proof junior? Lets test you. Send me proof of who you are with
    a verified address, and I'll send you a non-disclosure agreement to sign,
    with an automatic $150,000 judgement against you, should you fail to honor
    it. You game junior?

    Here's betting you whine, snivel and lie like the idiot you are instead of
    saying yes.






    In <477ed49f$0$10618$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it>, on 01/05/2008
    at 01:51 AM, "Riccardo Rubini" said:



    >Gnak2POMD562@nospam.net wrote:
    >> Run along junior. You're getting repetitive and boring. Like idiots
    >> always are.


    >Cut the "junior" short and tell us who you are coward. You're the only
    >one repetitive here. Tell us who you are, if you have a fraction of
    >balls like the grown up man you claim to be, either **** off. You have
    >no credibility, coward.





  18. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    gao8dnnk@nospam.net wrote:
    > You want proof junior? Lets test you. Send me proof of who you are
    > with a verified address, and I'll send you a non-disclosure agreement
    > to sign, with an automatic $150,000 judgement against you, should you
    > fail to honor it. You game junior?


    This is interesting. And do you really believe such information is worth
    $150.000? LOL. Let's say you send me via e-mail a proof you're not Tim
    Martin, so this flame comes to an end. If I fail to honour this
    non-disclosure agreement between us, I owe you a can of beer. Your game?

    > Here's betting you whine, snivel and lie like the idiot you are
    > instead of saying yes.


    Wrong bet.



  19. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All




    I said you would be a whining, sniveling coward. Dumbasses like you
    always are.



    In <477ed978$0$4795$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it>, on 01/05/2008
    at 02:12 AM, "Riccardo Rubini" said:



    >gao8dnnk@nospam.net wrote:
    >> You want proof junior? Lets test you. Send me proof of who you are
    >> with a verified address, and I'll send you a non-disclosure agreement
    >> to sign, with an automatic $150,000 judgement against you, should you
    >> fail to honor it. You game junior?


    >This is interesting. And do you really believe such information is worth
    >$150.000? LOL. Let's say you send me via e-mail a proof you're not Tim
    >Martin, so this flame comes to an end. If I fail to honour this
    >non-disclosure agreement between us, I owe you a can of beer. Your game?


    >> Here's betting you whine, snivel and lie like the idiot you are
    >> instead of saying yes.


    >Wrong bet.





  20. Re: OS/2 - The Sadness Of It All

    gao8dnnk@nospam.net wrote:
    > I said you would be a whining, sniveling coward. Dumbasses like you
    > always are.


    You are the only coward of this newsgroup. Your identity isn't worth
    150.000$, it's probably not even worth **** under a bum's shoe. So simply
    give away your identity and quit being the anonymous prank caller with zero
    credibility and NO BALLS.

    Can you address this simple question: who are you? If you can't, your
    credibility equals none, whatever you say is **** and you stay a vile
    "hit-and-run" coward forever.



+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast