On 21 Mar 17  14:43:17, Sean Dennis said the following to Shawn Highfield:

SD>  SH>   Nothing wrong with that.  I'm just not in a position to do it that
SD>  SH> way with the old dos software I run.  Which is again part of the
SD>  SH> reason I've got this setup running (MBSE) as I'm trying hard to
SD>  SH> convince myself to just pull the plug on dos.
SD> 
SD> I'll tell you the truth with me: it was and is still painful at times with 
SD> and OS/2.  I ran it for so long that I still catch myself thinking in "OS/2
SD> terms" at times.  However, Linux, as an OS, can do so much more than OS/2 i
SD> its current form that it's silly to think about going back for me.

Agreed on this. From 1994 to around 2001, 2002 I think it was... I was by all
accounts a die-hard OS/2 user. I still think in OS/2 terms with some things. I
still remember how to do Rexx programming. The BBS is DOS-based but it ran so 
freaking unbelievably well under OS/2 and Rexx scripting allowed me to do 
things beyond DOS batch file scripting... or bugging the authors of the 
software in question to have them say "meh its not important".

When OS/2 would crash... which was extremely rare, it was actually easier to 
troubleshoot and fix than it is when Windows crashes. OS/2's bootstrap process
and its monolithic Config.Sys was so easy to work with.

I only transitioned from OS/2 to Windows 2000 at that time because it became 
harder and harder to find OS/2 device drivers for the new hardware I was 
using at the time. The server edition of OS/2 was also well out of my price 
point and did not support things that server editions of Windows were able to 
do; plus my IT career at the time was entirely Windows-centric.

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
 * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (618:500/24)