Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!noc.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!prism!gt2617c
From: gt2617c@prism.gatech.EDU (Brad Smalling)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Challenge to Microsoft supporters.
Message-ID: <95660@hydra.gatech.EDU>
Date: 1 May 93 23:35:56 GMT
References: <1993May1.154707.10177@hubcap.clemson.edu> <C6D616.25M@uceng.uc.edu> <1993May1.211741.25086@wam.umd.edu>
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Lines: 30

In article <1993May1.211741.25086@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
writes:
>In article <C6D616.25M@uceng.uc.edu> bferrell@ant.occ.uc.edu (Brett Ferrell)
writes:
>>In article <1993May1.154707.10177@hubcap.clemson.edu> ludes@hubcap.clemson.edu
(Larry "Ludes" Ludwig) writes:
>
>> and not being able to adress your memory better than DOS,
>
>	Not sure what you mean here.  OS/2 sees 16 megs, uses 5 or six
>	of these for it's own use (more if you want to count WinOS/2). 
>	Windows sees 16 megs, uses 3 or 4 (more like 5 if you count the
>	disk cache as I am for OS/2) for itself.  If memory efficiency 
>	were a big issue, PC GEOS would be the current king of the 
>	Intel desktop.

I assumed he was referring to OS/2's 32-bit flat model addressing while DOS
(and therefore Windows) use 20-bit segmented addressing.  As a programmer, I
agree that segmentation unnecessarily complicates things.  It's annoying, too.
But when just a Windows user, I don't think about it much.  And, I doubt many
other people think about it (or even care) when just writing a document,
calcing a spreadsheet, etc...It works and they get their work done.

Just a neutral comment:
It's funny, I think, how arguments about Windows vs OS/2 sound so very
similar to arguments about Atheism vs Christianity or something like that.
It's somehow very personal to people.  Convictions are irrational and
there's nothing wrong with that--it's just...interesting.
-- 
Brad Smalling :: Jr.EE :: GA Tech :: Atlanta, GA :: gt2617c@prism.gatech.edu
