> I recall, many years ago, when Roland told me of his plans to release an OS/
> version, that I told him he should do a Windows version first, because far
> more people use Windows than OS/2. I and the other utility developers were
> almost all uninterested in starting work on OS/2 versions.

  While a Windows version might be good for marketting, I don't really think
a Windows version would be all that hot.  The GUI would slow down the system
immensly, and Windows ITSELF would slow down the system as well...
Realistically, running the DOS version under almost any OS seems to work the
best.

> Now, we see the consequences. An OS/2 version that can't compete with the DO
> version because none of the utilities that make the complete VBBS "package"
> great are available in OS/2, and still no Windows version.

  It's the only major problem that OS/2 has with anything, really.  It's a
GREAT operating system, and nobody can argue against that point.  However,
there aren't a lot of applications out there for it, and Microsoft has
everyone brainwashed into using Windows...

  The other major problem with the OS/2 version, is that the only OS/2
compilers out there, really are either C/C++, or Rexx.  (Yes, there is BASIC
PDS, and they are working on some Pascal compilers, but...)  Because VBBS is
designed in QuickBASIC, and because the VBBS/2 source code was never released,
nobody has what they really need to make good OS/2 utilities for VBBS/2.
I mean, if you're into OS/2 programming, you're most likely into C/C++ or
Rexx, because those are the best languages available for OS/2.  Having the
majority of VBBS sysops knowing (or learning) only how to program in
QuickBASIC certainly doesn't help...

                            /\/ Richard Glidden \/\

                        --- * The Imperial Sanctum * ---
                         ---[VSB] [ASV] [DM/F!] [G3]---