HyperChem under OS/2
6 messages in this thread
Hi,
Sorry for the delay, but I was away for a week… I chose OS/2
because I wanted to work with a *real* OS as opposed to DOS/Windows on top
of each other (I may be setting myself up here :). Anyway, I found that
the so called "new" release of Windows 3.1 (a bug fix IMHO) is still
plagued by the same problems as the 3.0 – they just replaced the GUI and
are now giving the memory location where there is a conflict instead of
that cute stop sign which signified the UAE. Also, under OS/2 any DOS
(make that most of) DOS apps can be made to run in the background and once
can easily switch between them. Finally, it is a fully fledged 32-bit OS
which I believe takes better advantage of the 486 chip.
On the -ve side, I've had some trouble getting some things to work,
and if the support for it won't be forthcoming than it just may turn out to
be a lot of hoopla, so I understand your point of view. Basically, I am
looking at it from this point: I am a chemist who wants to run calculations
and wants to be able to present them in a neat and easily understandble
form. I also want to minimize the time it takes to run them. Thus far from
what I saw of HyperChem, it seesm like *it* is *just* the thing that I
would like to have, however, I would not like to be a slave to a single
application, so if it won't run under OS/2 and/or if the Win32 or NT (or
some other thingy that they will come up with as in DOS 3.3, 3.31, 4.0,
4.01, etc., they usual story) will not perform up to par, than I probably
will not invest in it.
John Duchowski
John,
Keep your fingers crossed. IBM has promised a patch for both the memory
conflict problems and the 16 bit graphics for OS/2. They have even gone so
far as to announce that an upgrade to version 2.01 will be available some
time next year. With the memory patch and graphic fix, most of the new DOS
programs should run very well in a DOS window under OS/2.
BTW, These patches are in the works right now.
John,
We don't have OS/2 here in house, but my current impression is that most
enhanced-mode Windows apps (which HyperChem is) will not run under OS/2.
Further, the computational part of the program is 32-bit arithmetic, which
I believe (rumour again) is not supported by OS/2. I certainly do not want
to get into OS/2 vs Windows wars, but the claim by IBM to be a "Better
Windows than Windows" and the suggestion that it will run all Windows apps
is simply not true. This is not a reflection of HyperChem, except in that
it is a product that, by using 32-bit mathematics, uses many facilities of
Windows.
HyperChem will not run in a DOS window, of course, unless you can get
enhanced mode Windows running in that window, which I very much doubt.
Tom Slee
Tom,
What you say is true today, and I too thought that IBM was just tooting a
horn to cut into the MS Windows sales. But in the last month, Big Blue has
publicly made a commitment to fix OS/2 to be what they initially stated it
to be. The surprising part is that they are willing to do this as it will
delay the development of PINK (their Apple/IBM OS).
John,
Very interesting. It would certainly be nice to have OS/2 HyperChem. I
will watch developments with interest.
Tom
>> the claim by IBM to be a "Better Windows than Windows" and the
suggestion that it will run all Windows apps is simply not true. This is
not a reflection of HyperChem…
Tom,
OS/2 is a better Windows than Windows … Windows 2.1, that is <g>.
And if its any consolation, Mathematica can't run under OS/2 either, for
the largely the same reasons as HyperChem.
Rich