Benjamin wrote:
>
> I am not so sure about that ...... You might be a OS/2 fan, but I am
> not. OS X's programming framework is totally OOP and great architecture.
> I do agree that if somehow apple could get IBM to make the high end OS X
> server (e.g 16 CPU hyper cube) that will give OS X some recognition, but
> that will never happen :P
>
> 2 15, 2002, at 02:02 , Joel M. Sciamma wrote:
>
> > OS/2 was/is what we should have been using instead of X but IBM didn't
> > want
> > to make MS Office available on it and I believe that had a big effect
> > on the
> > take up.
>
I suspect Joel was referring to XWindows, which indeed has a lousy
programming framework (or so I'm told).
As for OS/2, I was assured that IBM's VisualAge C++ for OS/2 IDE is one
of the sexiest development tools ever devised by man.
-- Karel Jansens kareljansens_at_tiscalinet.be"We're here to kick ass and chew bubble gum, and we're all out of gum." (Dr. Zulu of Team Diotoir on Robot Wars Extreme)
-- This is the Newtontalk mailinglist - http://www.newtontalk.net To unsubscribe or manage: visit the above link or mailto:newtontalk-request_at_newtontalk.net?Subject=unsubscribe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sat Mar 02 2002 - 10:03:12 EST