[964] in OS/2_Discussion
Re: OS/2 and Win95 Dual Boot
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Pehr Anderson)
Thu Jun 20 23:47:43 1996
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 23:49:35 -0400
To: krlynch@MIT.EDU, os2partners@MIT.EDU
From: Pehr Anderson <pehr@MIT.EDU>
At 08:18 PM 6/20/96 -0400, krlynch@MIT.EDU wrote:
>
>I tried to set up a machine in just the configuration you describe. Win95's
>install will not permit you to continue if OS/2 is on the drive. The install
>program gives you a pointer to a readme file with extensive instructions on
>removing OS/2 from the system, but not on how to try and make them
>coexist. I didn't attempt to perform a Warp install over Win95, and I didn't
>try any real trickery to get around the Win95 installation program. If you
>figure it out, let me know!
>
>Kevin
>
I installed OS/2 on top of my new P100 that came with Win95. It ran
like a champ. OS/2 worked great in dual boot mode & allowed me to switch
back & forth easily between operating systems.
On the other hand, myself and four other computer junkies once tried
to de-install Win95 because it's automatic 'scan for new hardware'
was destroying his existing hardware. It wouldn't let go of the disk
until we formatted the partition. What a nightmare. (Installing
OS/2 would also have made this de-installation process easy but we
didn't have the disks.)
I'm currently using windows NT because it is more stable than OS/2.
NT (4.0B2) doesn't implement the iconized file manager nearly as well as OS/2.
NT also doesn't run as many dos applications, or any that need to use
devices like the sound card or other basic IO. This is mainly a security
feature but it creates a lot of compatibility problems with DOS software.
It chief advantage is that it is really robust.
-pehr OS/2 vetran on hiatus
Pehr Anderson _ __ __
RSI '91 ' ) ) / / ) /
Alpha Delta Phi /--' _ /_ __ /--/ ____ __/ _ __ _ ______
Eta Kappa Nu / </_/ /_/ (_ / (_/ / <_(_/_</_/ (_/_)_(_) / <_
MIT '96 pehr@mit.edu http://web.mit.edu/pehr/www/home.html
