SPONSORED LINKS
> > involved. My brother is heavily involved with IBM's OS/2 marketing effort, > > but OS/2 and I have never gotten along very well, so I'm a DOS/Windows user. > Well, if you want to start to get to know OS/2 better, this is the place > to do it. I'd say about 75% of us use OS/2 on our TPs. And one of I figured as much--IBM would have to be shooting themselves in the foot to offer a non-OS/2-compat. notebook machine! > the main reasons for that, I'd guess, is the fact that it's one of the > few notebooks that come with OS/2 drivers and can handle OS/2 as > well as DOS/Win. That is, of course, a very good fact. > Of course, if DOS/Win makes you happy, then by all means, stick with > it! :) If the name Dave Whittle sounds at all familiar to you (Pick up the August (?) "OS/2 Professional" Magazine), then you'll know that I have been influenced by one of the best. <G!> Nevertheless, its not an issue of "learning" OS/2 as much as it is a usage issue. I've argued my view of the situation many times before and frankly have no desire to do so here--I'm here for the TP support! Suffice to say that I believe two things: (1) OS/2 works best with OS/2-based software just like I'm not fond of running DOS apps under Windows. (2) I'd switch over to OS/2 *tomorrow* if *all* (or nearly all) of my regularly-used applications were ported to OS/2 versions and I could have them for the price of disks and manuals alone. As of now, the only app. I use that has a native-OS/2 counter- part is Ami Pro. Meanwhile, I've been very disappointed by the speed-hit I take when using my apps under OS/2--I therefore see no reason to run Windows apps. under OS/2. The story would be very different with a set of OS/2-based applications. > > My only beef? I'm *VERY* disappointed in the battery life. I haven't > > yet run too many trials witht he C as I've had it for only a few days, but > > Some day, I'd like to do a battery life test and average out the results > we get from this mailing list. I've tried a while ago but there were > only two other people on the list at the time. I'm sure there are enough now--try it. > I find that I average around 2 hours (give or take half an hour) but > then again, I often use my PCMCIA modem during the majority of it > as well as other taxing tasks such as disk intensive programs (but > then again, when isn't OS/2 disk intensive except maybe on Robert > Dewar's machine -- who has 20MB RAM). I've never gotten much lower > than 2 hours and have gotten up to 3. I managed 3 for the first time just last night--and that was on completely "low" settings and most of the time it sat idle (for the purpose of measuring time, I set it to not suspend very frequently) on a table. That would *never* be the case under normal use, I fear... But even the 2 1/2 hour times I got, it was just sitting on a table doing nothing with the settings on "high"--just so I could measure the time it got. It wasn't pretty... > > Thoughts? I'd really like to resolve this--I want 3.4 hours! > > Not likely on the 750C unfortunately. As a matter of fact, I've Then they (IBM) should never have claimed that number--at least not as a "low-end" claim. I was under the mistaken impression that when they say "3.4 to 8 hours" I can expect, as a bare minimum, 3.4 hours. > never seen an active matrix that could make it that long. My > friend's Austin has a battery life of around 1 hour and my other > friend's Nec Versa has about a 2 hour life on a good day. Sleezy marketers... =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Randy Whittle whittle@scf.usc.edu University of Southern California (Dodging QUAKES in L.A.!!) Chocolate junkie, Motorcycle nut, HP 48 user, and of course...Computer geek "It's not denial, I'm just very selective about the reality I accept." -Calvin