• OS/2 anyone.

    From dccxxvii@1:116/18 to All on Fri Nov 16 03:55:44 2012
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the plethora of
    junk he generated has died down, would anyone actually interested in
    OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might want use it in preference to
    other OS's?

    --
    ========
    dccxxvii
    ========

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Aioe.org NNTP Server (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From Carl@1:116/18 to All on Fri Nov 16 13:04:56 2012
    On 11/16/12 3:55 AM, dccxxvii wrote:
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the plethora of
    junk he generated has died down, would anyone actually interested in
    OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might want use it in preference to
    other OS's?


    If a computer does what you want and need, why upgrade?

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Omicron Theta | Memphis TN | fpsoft.net (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From srojasramirez@yahoo.com.mx@1:116/18 to All on Sat Nov 17 03:43:16 2012
    On Friday, November 16, 2012 3:55:47 AM UTC-6, dccxxvii wrote:
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the plethora of

    junk he generated has died down, would anyone actually interested in

    OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might want use it in preference to

    other OS's?



    --

    ========

    dccxxvii

    ========

    why use it: for reacreational purposes, I sometime like to use my old OSs (win 95, 98,winme, **OS/2**) just to see how they were, and try to use it in my daily work, of course not always with the result I wanted
    but is fun

    i still have my Os/2 warp 3 disks, I wish I had the cd

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Omicron Theta | Memphis TN | fpsoft.net (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From dccxxvii@1:116/18 to All on Sat Nov 17 13:51:37 2012
    Carl ( carl@noaddress.invalid ) wrote to comp.os.os2.advocacy:

    On 11/16/12 3:55 AM, dccxxvii wrote:
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the plethora of
    junk he generated has died down, would anyone actually interested in
    OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might want use it in preference
    to other OS's?


    If a computer does what you want and need, why upgrade?

    Is OS/2 an upgrade though? That's the question....

    Thanks for taking the time to answer.

    --
    ========
    dccxxvii
    ========

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Aioe.org NNTP Server (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From dccxxvii@1:116/18 to All on Sat Nov 17 13:51:39 2012
    srojasramirez ( ) wrote to comp.os.os2.advocacy:

    On Friday, November 16, 2012 3:55:47 AM UTC-6, dccxxvii wrote:
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the plethora
    of
    junk he generated has died down, would anyone actually interested
    in
    OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might want use it in preference
    to
    other OS's?

    Why use it: for reacreational purposes, I sometime like to use my old
    OSs (win 95, 98,winme, **OS/2**) just to see how they were, and try
    to use it in my daily work, of course not always with the result I
    wanted but is fun

    i still have my Os/2 warp 3 disks, I wish I had the cd

    That seems a sensible point of view, I dual boot linux and windows
    though there is little linux is more convenient for if I'm honest. The
    thing is OS/2 costs a not inconsiderable amount of money while Linux is
    free...

    --
    ========
    dccxxvii
    ========

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Aioe.org NNTP Server (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From Carl@1:116/18 to All on Mon Nov 19 12:03:20 2012
    On 11/17/12 1:51 PM, dccxxvii wrote:
    Carl ( carl@noaddress.invalid ) wrote to comp.os.os2.advocacy:

    On 11/16/12 3:55 AM, dccxxvii wrote:
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the plethora of
    junk he generated has died down, would anyone actually interested in
    OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might want use it in preference
    to other OS's?


    If a computer does what you want and need, why upgrade?

    Is OS/2 an upgrade though? That's the question....

    Not by today's measure, I would say.

    However, if you have been using OS/2 for the past two decades, you might
    not feel like upgrading if you think that modern systems don't really
    offer that much additional value.

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Omicron Theta | Memphis TN | fpsoft.net (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From dccxxvii@1:116/18 to All on Tue Nov 20 04:33:01 2012
    Carl ( carl@noaddress.invalid ) wrote to comp.os.os2.advocacy:

    On 11/17/12 1:51 PM, dccxxvii wrote:
    Carl ( carl@noaddress.invalid ) wrote to comp.os.os2.advocacy:

    On 11/16/12 3:55 AM, dccxxvii wrote:
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the
    plethora of junk he generated has died down, would anyone
    actually interested in OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might
    want use it in preference to other OS's?


    If a computer does what you want and need, why upgrade?

    Is OS/2 an upgrade though? That's the question....

    Not by today's measure, I would say.

    However, if you have been using OS/2 for the past two decades, you
    might not feel like upgrading if you think that modern systems don't
    really offer that much additional value.

    OK, that makes sense, thanks.

    --
    ========
    dccxxvii
    ========

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Aioe.org NNTP Server (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From Hello, Purbeck@1:116/18 to All on Wed Nov 28 12:48:47 2012
    On 19/11/2012 18:03, Carl wrote:
    On 11/17/12 1:51 PM, dccxxvii wrote:
    Carl ( carl@noaddress.invalid ) wrote to comp.os.os2.advocacy:

    On 11/16/12 3:55 AM, dccxxvii wrote:
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the plethora of
    junk he generated has died down, would anyone actually interested in
    OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might want use it in preference
    to other OS's?


    If a computer does what you want and need, why upgrade?

    Is OS/2 an upgrade though? That's the question....

    Not by today's measure, I would say.

    However, if you have been using OS/2 for the past two decades, you might not feel like upgrading if you think that modern systems don't really offer that much additional value.

    You mean there are people out there who aren't on Facebook?

    Man!

    HP

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From Bob Campbell@1:116/18 to All on Sat Dec 29 11:07:45 2012
    On 11/16/12 04:55 am, dccxxvii wrote:
    Now that the troll tholen has seemingly departed and the plethora of
    junk he generated has died down, would anyone actually interested in
    OS/2 like to give me reasons why I might want use it in preference to
    other OS's?

    There is really no reason to use OS/2 as your only computer these days.
    Unless you like banging your head against the wall.

    However, it remains an interesting thing to play with. The challenge
    of getting it to do anything useful is fun - assuming you like
    challenges. For example, I just got the networking going, and got
    Thunderbird running here.

    I used to use OS/2 all the time, but that was 20 years ago. It got me
    thru the Windows 3.0/3.1 era. OS/2 2.1 and 3.0 ran Win 3.1 and DOS apps better than Win 3.1 and DOS. When Win 95 and NT 4 became available, I abandoned OS/2 since it was clear IBM was also. When Will Zachmann
    came to the same conclusion a year or so later, everyone knew it was all
    over for OS/2.

    These days OS/2 is little more than a historical curiosity. Along with
    others like the many Unix OSes (Coherent, Xenix etc. among many others I
    had), the Apple Lisa, the Apple ///, TRS-80s and the dozen or so OSes
    they had, CPM etc. etc.

    All gone, some nearly forgotten.

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: DisOrg, Inc. (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From =?iso-8859-1?q?tholen=40ant=ECspam=@1:116/18 to All on Sat Jan 5 12:53:58 2013
    On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:07:45 -0500, Bob Campbell wrote:

    Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy

    There is really no reason to use OS/2 as your only computer these days.
    Unless you like banging your head against the wall.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    However, it remains an interesting thing to play with.

    Classic erroneous presupposition.

    The challenge of getting it to do anything useful is fun - assuming
    you like challenges.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    For example, I just got the networking going, and got Thunderbird
    running here.

    Good for you.

    I used to use OS/2 all the time, but that was 20 years ago. It got me
    thru the Windows 3.0/3.1 era.

    It can get you thru[sic] the Windows 8 era, too.

    OS/2 2.1 and 3.0 ran Win 3.1 and DOS apps better than Win 3.1 and
    DOS.

    Classic pontification.

    When Win 95 and NT 4 became available, I abandoned OS/2 since it was
    clear IBM was also. When Will Zachmann came to the same conclusion a
    year or so later, everyone knew it was all over for OS/2.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    These days OS/2 is little more than a historical curiosity.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    Along with others like the many Unix OSes (Coherent, Xenix etc. among
    many others I had), the Apple Lisa, the Apple ///, TRS-80s and the
    dozen or so OSes they had, CPM etc. etc.

    What does that have to do with OS/2, Campbell?

    All gone, some nearly forgotten.

    Unlike OS/2.

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Murphy-Foam Detoxification Squad (1:116/18@fidonet)
  • From -= Usenet Legend Robert James =-@1:116/18 to All on Wed Jan 16 17:01:58 2013
    Reply-To: Matthew Moulton's Killfile.

    On 05 Jan 2013; tholenbot glugged down some extra strong DXM
    cough syrup and vomited all over Usenet. I am so pissed that
    tholenbot selfishly hogged the whole bottle without sharing
    some with me:

    On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:07:45 -0500, Bob Campbell wrote:

    Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy

    There is really no reason to use OS/2 as your only computer these
    days. 1> Unless you like banging your head against the wall.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    However, it remains an interesting thing to play with.

    Classic erroneous presupposition.

    The challenge of getting it to do anything useful is fun - assuming
    you like challenges.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    For example, I just got the networking going, and got Thunderbird
    running here.

    Good for you.

    I used to use OS/2 all the time, but that was 20 years ago. It got
    me 1> thru the Windows 3.0/3.1 era.

    It can get you thru[sic] the Windows 8 era, too.

    OS/2 2.1 and 3.0 ran Win 3.1 and DOS apps better than Win 3.1 and
    DOS.

    Classic pontification.

    When Win 95 and NT 4 became available, I abandoned OS/2 since it
    was 1> clear IBM was also. When Will Zachmann came to the same
    conclusion a 1> year or so later, everyone knew it was all over for
    OS/2.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    These days OS/2 is little more than a historical curiosity.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    Along with others like the many Unix OSes (Coherent, Xenix etc.
    among 1> many others I had), the Apple Lisa, the Apple ///, TRS-80s
    and the 1> dozen or so OSes they had, CPM etc. etc.

    What does that have to do with OS/2, Campbell?

    All gone, some nearly forgotten.

    Unlike OS/2.

    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous follow-up. What does
    alt.usenet.kooks have to do with alt.test, tholenbot?

    --
    http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/5393/chatzombiesucks.jpg http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/03/08/1015365742538.html http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/709-what-should-we-do.html http://www.ricksblog.com/my_weblog/2010/12/moron-alert.html

    --- MBSE BBS v0.95.15 (GNU/Linux-i386)
    * Origin: Canadian coalition against international Usenet f (1:116/18@fidonet)