AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 00:17:49 -0800 (PST), Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>Mainframe.
>
>>OS/2 2.0 suffered a similar fate when it was released for General
>>Availability in March of 1992. It was riddled with bugs inherited
>>from Microsoft, and enabling certain features that improved
>>performance had a horrible toll on reliability. In 1994, OS/2 2.0 was
>>replaced with Warp 3.0, which had a "spare tire" mode, allowing users
>
> You're forgetting OS/2 2.1 and OS/2 2.1 for windows.
> The former was the first very useable 32 bit version and the second
> was made affordable by not paying money to microsoft for the windows 3.1
> licence.
>
> Also: warp 3.0 didn't replace 2.1. It should have been called 2.2,
> it was basically a bugfix release with some optimizations
> incorporated.
That's not how I remember it. Warp had a complete facelift afaicr. And
it came with internet support built in as well as other features.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/2#The_.22Warp.22_years
>
>
>
>>to generate a recovery desktop. This allowed them to recover from a
>>crash or disk failure very quickly. Still, it was a messy recovery.
>>When Warp 4.0 came out, it was very solid, very reliable, and on the
>
> Might as well have been called 2.2.1. 4.0 had very little to offer that
> was new except for speech recognition that didn't work terribly well.
It worked quite well for the time - or it did for me. And it had Java.
--
Arlington National Cemetery <--> Ignorant teeny American toll
-- anagrama
|
|
