🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <49mfih$2...@usenet2.interramp.com> ir00...@interramp.com (Billy Ko) writes:
>In message <49kjg5$9...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu> - "jdm." <jdma...@unity.ncsu.edu> wri
>tes:
>:>
>:>
>:>
>:>But don't stop there, look at OS/2.  complex beast,
>:>one with no software and hardware support.
>:>
>:>So there's little doubt who'll win the OS Wars.
>:>Windows 95, where do you want to go today?
>:>
>
>Where do I want to go today?  Certainly, I'd like to get there without a 
>crash... So I'll stick with OS/2
>
>Bill
>Team OS/2

Ya know, Bill, it's nice and everything to support your product, but you're
just plain wrong. Windows95 does not crash nearly as much as people claim, and
I've had my copy since the very beginning of September. Three months. And it's
crashed twice. Furthermore, those crashes were *my* doing, not Windows. Maybe
that's not a long time span, but wherever I'm going I've yet to crash Windows
on purpose.

And, for the record, while I believe OS/2 is a superior product to Windows95,
being a superior product is not necessarily indicative of what will win out.
IBM made one mistake, which was to think Windows95 was going to flop, and 
therefore choose not to support any programs on it. That was the one big 
mistake. That is also why I do not have OS/2 on my system, because the
current version will not support any of the new Win95-based applications
being developed.



-- 
 "Yes! I am invincible!" - Boris, Goldeneye


  (     (    (   (  ( ((( In Stereo, Where Available ))) )  )   )    )     )