RE: Dual core, Quad core??
June 5, 2009 at 4:23 pm
(This post was last modified: June 5, 2009 at 4:29 pm by Kyuuketsuki.)
(June 5, 2009 at 3:16 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: OS/2 was supposed to be the next DOS, a protected mode DOS (It was supposed to be called CP/DOS).
OS/2 1.0 had no network support at all, 1.1 which IBM didn't sell outside its own client base had SNA support for connecting to IBM Mainframes. OS/2 1.2 was the first to have a networking engine supporting TCP/IP and IPX/SPX.
The first OS/2 that the general audience could buy with network support was OS/2 2.0 after the break-up with Microsoft.
NT 3.1 inherited the OS/2 1.2 LAN Manager networking engine, coupled with the improved BSD TCP/IP Unix stack.
Fair enough but NT had networking from the very first indeed as I recall OS/2 derived much from NT because MS and IBM had some kind of agreement and MS (when they pulled out) had no choice but to honour it.
Kyu
(June 5, 2009 at 3:15 pm)rjh Wrote: Well in one instance i see no evidence that it has changed and in the other i see adaptation. I'm not talking ancient history, the flawed foundation is clearly still there. If it wasn't, the likes of viruses wouldn't be as rampant as they are now.
You are wrong in both respects (I can only assume you must be blind and historically ignorant as NT is not Windows 9x or a variant of it and was developed primarily by DEC's Dave Cutler as a serious competitor to UNIX and was based more on DEC's VMS and aspects of MS's co-op with IBM) ... I don't see this going well so let's just agree to disagree (I will continue it if you wish).
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
