Win64 Pro - OS2Warp

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Kue2, May 12, 2006.

  1. Kue2

    Kue2 Guest

    It reminds me of all the fun I use to have loading drivers in OS2Warp. But
    once u got "it" the operating systems both run fine.
    Kue2, May 12, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Never used OS/2, but I was watching this interview with Bill Gates saying he
    was scared of it, since a lot of banks were using it for their ATM's and how
    banks love OS/2. I have to say, XP Pro x64 is a great OS, no problems at
    all, everything just works. For 2000 Professional I had to wait a few months
    before my modem, printer and scanner were supported.
    --
    --
    Andre
    Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

    "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > It reminds me of all the fun I use to have loading drivers in OS2Warp. But
    > once u got "it" the operating systems both run fine.
    >
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], May 12, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Kue2

    Martin S. Guest

    I was working for a national bank a couple of years back, they were in the
    process of a complete conversion to XP. However, they still had app's that
    needed OS/2 that weren't getting converted anytime soon, they also had
    Virtual PC running for the OS/2 stuff. I'm sure at some point though they
    would replace these OS/2 app's with XP app's.


    "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Never used OS/2, but I was watching this interview with Bill Gates saying
    > he was scared of it, since a lot of banks were using it for their ATM's
    > and how banks love OS/2. I have to say, XP Pro x64 is a great OS, no
    > problems at all, everything just works. For 2000 Professional I had to
    > wait a few months before my modem, printer and scanner were supported.
    > --
    > --
    > Andre
    > Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    > Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    > Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    > http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    >
    > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >> It reminds me of all the fun I use to have loading drivers in OS2Warp.
    >> But once u got "it" the operating systems both run fine.
    >>

    >
    >
    Martin S., May 12, 2006
    #3
  4. Where I work we have one chip placement machine (those machines that place
    the small rectangular components and integrated circuits on motherboards an
    other electronic devices) which runs on OS/2.
    Alive 'n tickin'
    Carlos

    "Martin S." wrote:

    > I was working for a national bank a couple of years back, they were in the
    > process of a complete conversion to XP. However, they still had app's that
    > needed OS/2 that weren't getting converted anytime soon, they also had
    > Virtual PC running for the OS/2 stuff. I'm sure at some point though they
    > would replace these OS/2 app's with XP app's.
    >
    >
    > "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    > > Never used OS/2, but I was watching this interview with Bill Gates saying
    > > he was scared of it, since a lot of banks were using it for their ATM's
    > > and how banks love OS/2. I have to say, XP Pro x64 is a great OS, no
    > > problems at all, everything just works. For 2000 Professional I had to
    > > wait a few months before my modem, printer and scanner were supported.
    > > --
    > > --
    > > Andre
    > > Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    > > Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    > > Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    > > http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    > >
    > > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > > news:%...
    > >> It reminds me of all the fun I use to have loading drivers in OS2Warp.
    > >> But once u got "it" the operating systems both run fine.
    > >>

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    >
    =?Utf-8?B?Q2FybG9z?=, May 13, 2006
    #4
  5. I think the reason why IBM failed with OS\2, they were complacent, and they
    really didn't have a developer story, there was no incentive really for
    developers to target the platform or at least IBM did not make it clear
    enough. Also, the clones were kind of suspecious also, the enemy developing
    the OS to run on our hardware?
    --
    Andre
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

    "Man-wai Chang" <> wrote in message
    news:%23c$...
    > Kue2 wrote:
    >> It reminds me of all the fun I use to have loading drivers in OS2Warp.
    >> But
    >> once u got "it" the operating systems both run fine.

    >
    > Back then, OS/2 is the best one to execute old DOS applications. IBM
    > have backward compatibility in mind. But M$ was trying to monopolize
    > everything, and everyone bought into its believes...
    >
    > I still have my OS/2 disks with me... Anyway, we got Linux now.
    >
    >
    > --
    > .~. Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY. http://www.linux-sxs.org
    > / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
    > /( _ )\ (Ubuntu 5.10) Linux 2.6.16.16
    > ^ ^ 17:53:02 up 1 day 2:20 0 users load average: 1.00 1.01 1.00
    > news://news.3home.net news://news.hkpcug.org news://news.newsgroup.com.hk
    >
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], May 13, 2006
    #5
  6. Kue2

    Agent86 Guest

    Plus IBM tried to get the OEM's to pay royaltiess on ISA bus computers
    (all they had ever sold) in order to bundle OS2. That is what really
    drove the nails in its coffin. They tried that with MicroChannel too
    and where is it today?


    On Fri, 12 May 2006 17:17:19 -0700, "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]"
    <> wrote:

    >I think the reason why IBM failed with OS\2, they were complacent, and they
    >really didn't have a developer story, there was no incentive really for
    >developers to target the platform or at least IBM did not make it clear
    >enough. Also, the clones were kind of suspecious also, the enemy developing
    >the OS to run on our hardware?
    Agent86, Jun 1, 2006
    #6
  7. Kue2

    George Guest

    It's time to suck it up, and move on. Why don't we talk about the
    uselessness of XP64 instead?

    "Agent86" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Plus IBM tried to get the OEM's to pay royaltiess on ISA bus computers
    > (all they had ever sold) in order to bundle OS2. That is what really
    > drove the nails in its coffin. They tried that with MicroChannel too
    > and where is it today?
    >
    >
    > On Fri, 12 May 2006 17:17:19 -0700, "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>I think the reason why IBM failed with OS\2, they were complacent, and
    >>they
    >>really didn't have a developer story, there was no incentive really for
    >>developers to target the platform or at least IBM did not make it clear
    >>enough. Also, the clones were kind of suspecious also, the enemy
    >>developing
    >>the OS to run on our hardware?
    George, Jun 1, 2006
    #7
  8. Kue2

    DP Guest

    "George" <george23%@qol.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > It's time to suck it up, and move on. Why don't we talk about the
    > uselessness of XP64 instead?
    >


    I guess uselessness is in the eye of the beholder. X64 works for me and for
    a lot of people in this ng.

    If it's not working for you, maybe it's something that people here can help
    you fix.
    Or if you just don't like it, that's cool. No point in arguing that. It
    would be a silly as arguing which is the prettiest color or who's the
    greatest rock band ever or what's the best-tasting food.
    DP, Jun 2, 2006
    #8
  9. x64 versions of the OS are most "useful" when you have:

    (A) more than 2 GBytes of physical RAM in the machine

    and

    (B) are running either 64-bit native applications -or- 32-bit applications
    built with LARGEADDRESSAWARE (which many applications are not)



    The other scenario that would be improved with x64 is:

    (A) more than 2 GBytes of physical RAM in the machine

    and

    (B) you are running several memory-intensive applications at once where the
    bottleneck is virtual memory demand paging to disk rather than computation,
    graphics performance, etc.



    If neither of these scenarios apply to you, then you probably won't see much
    benefit in installing the x64 editions at this time.

    There are a lot of architectural improvements that go with x64 native code
    that will benefit applications that move to it over time, but the memory
    addressability still the primary reason 64-bit technology is an improvement
    over 32-bit. When systems start shipping with more than 2 GB of RAM standard
    in the box, it will in fact be a waste of money to have anything but x64
    Editions running on those machines.

    --
    Chuck Walbourn
    SDE, Game Technology Group

    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    Chuck Walbourn [MSFT], Jun 2, 2006
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. bmoag

    Experience with Win64

    bmoag, Nov 21, 2005, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    438
    Colin Nowell
    Dec 8, 2005
  2. del win64 partition?

    , Jun 6, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    359
    tomas
    Jun 8, 2006
  3. =?Utf-8?B?THVrZV9OZWVkc19IZWxw?=

    Win64 and Raid configuration

    =?Utf-8?B?THVrZV9OZWVkc19IZWxw?=, May 30, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    416
    =?Utf-8?B?THVrZQ==?=
    Jun 1, 2005
  4. Replies:
    7
    Views:
    361
    Andre Da Costa
    Aug 29, 2005
  5. =?Utf-8?B?cGF1bA==?=

    acrobat pro unable to install printer: win64

    =?Utf-8?B?cGF1bA==?=, Nov 5, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    684
    =?Utf-8?B?cGF1bA==?=
    Nov 24, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page