Have they given up?

[David Gaskill]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 08:28:25 -0700, John Bridges wrote:

>I found WinNT much more stable than OS/2, in particular the relatively simple
>windows desktop was nearly rock solid, and could easily be backed up, while
>my OS/2 desktop was extremely flakey (and slow) needing constant care and 3rd
>party utilities to backup and massage.  Like Steve, I wasn't so impressed
>with WPS. Nice to have shadows be truely connected to files instead of the
>.LNK kludge in Windows. But the .LNK files mostly work and are predictabe,
>while shadows did strange things when files were moved around or copied by
>non WPS programs.

Like you I have had extensive experience of both operating systems and in case 
anybody suggests that your experiences atypical I can say that my experience of 
the two operating systems is near identical to yours. 

There is this myth that OS/2 is more stable than any other operating system; this 
may well have been true for 3.1, 95 and 98 but it is certainly not true as far as 
NT/2000 are concerned.

David