Robert Bull wrote in a message to Roy J. Tellason:

 RB> Hello, Roy;

 RB> 21 Jul 03 04:06, Roy J. Tellason wrote to Robert Bull:

 RT> I have a couple of copies of OS/2 here,  and in fact have it installed
 RT> on a couple of machines,  though I don't use it.  I was *real*
 RT> enthusiastic about it a few years back,  but I've lost a lot of that
 RT> enthusiasm as time has gone by.  Too much stuff in there that's
 RT> specific to OS/2,  too much in there that I don't understand,  too
 RT> much orientation on IBM's part to selling it to the business market
 RT> that will pay for support (which is where they make their money when
 RT> it comes to OS/2 these days),  and not enough support for a variety of
 RT> hardware.

 RB> Hm, looks like IBM have turned into Microsoft-roaders, but I
 RB> suppose some of your criticisms could be levelled at =any= OS.  My
 RB> boss contends that IBM don't plug OS/2 any more because it's so
 RB> stable; they make more money  supporting M$ OSs that aren't.

Your boss probably has a point there...

 RT> installed today.  One other for games and such runs w98,  another runs
 RT> OS/2 but it's been *ages* since I turned that one on.  And there are
 RT> more,  will be more,  as I have a 16-port hub and only 5-6 of those
 RT> allocated so far.  :-)

 RB> I wish I had that sort of space to devote to a hobby  :-)

I don't.  Got a big L-shaped desk here,  and I had to build a "second
level" for it to stick the machines on.

 RT> just ftp to the server and make copies of everything over there.  It's
 RT> highly unlikely that I'll see failure in both machines at the same

 RB> My boss recently had failures on two different HDs one after the
 RB> other.  Fortunately he had back-ups.  You might want to do at
 RB> least a weekly tape back-up still.

I've been planning to implement a backup strategy here but it's a matter of
sitting down and taking the time to do it,  and I keep getting busy with
other things.

---