cws9669@isc.rit.edu (C.W. Southern ) (05/22/91)
What are the differences between OS/2 1.3 and OS/2 2.0 for a user, no a programmer. -- ___ ___ / /__ INTERNET: cws9669@ultb.rit.edu /___hristopher ___/outhern cws9669@cs.rit.edu 255 Andrews Memorial Drive. BITNET: cws9669@RITVAX
wayne@csri.toronto.edu (Wayne Hayes) (05/25/91)
For the users: - CPU-intensive programs written specifically for 2.0 should run about twice as fast as the same application written for 1.x (since they run in 32-bit mode -- they can do 32-bit arithmetic easily, and also they don't have to worry about 64K segment stuff). - They can run multiple DOS boxes concurrently, whereas 1.x only had one DOS box. Also, the DOS box will nearly always give you a "better DOS than DOS". If you use HPFS you'll get disk speadup immediately; you'll nearly always have MUCH more memory available in the DOS box under OS/2 2.0 than if you were running straight DOS; and you can even concurrently run multiple versions of DOS. - you can run DOS applications in a window and even dynamically switch it between a window and a full-screen -- even if it uses graphics. - a borderline user concern, but since OS/2 2.0 is 32-bit flat address space, you may see more and better ports of non-DOS software (read Unix, mostly) to OS/2 that was nearly impossible to port to DOS or OS/2 1.x. (Read "GNU" -- gcc? emacs? X-emacs? Who knows!) This will increase the OS/2 software base, which is definitely a plus for the user. -- NOTICE: Due to the complexity of nearly all topics, the opinions expressed above are in continual process of formation and may be changed without notice. Wayne Hayes INTERNET: wayne@csri.utoronto.ca CompuServe: 72401,3525