🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3ok4fp$a...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
           khc...@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu "Oliver Chung" writes:

> 
> I look forward to your Win95 games which will get 90% of games'
> market (I would be interested to see how MS force those DOS gamers
> to buy Win95 though).  

They won't.  Software developers will make us buy Win95.
Many compainies are supporting Win95 already in their development.

> While you wait, I will be happily playing 
> both DOS and OS/2 games, and I may have already got a few
Well many people have the beta (400,000+ copies sold!) and are happily
using Win95 NOW.  Even as a beta it runs very well.

> While you wait, I will be happily playin
> *multithreaded* OS/2 games (GalCiv, Avarice, Entrepretner, thanks

Cor such marvelous famous games there.  Lets face it they aren't
falcon 4 or Ultima 9 are they? Games like these are being written 
for Win95 ONLY at the moment).

> to SDS) before Win95 is even available.  BTW, 0% of them will be
> compatible with Win95.

GOOD!

> >>Not if you are running more than one at a time, a few Win95 beta
> >>testers posted that one DOS app will slow down the whole system.
> >
> >When could you EVER multitask games in DOS or Win3.x?  You never could!
> >It is true that Win95 multitasking of DOS is not very quick but it serves
> >its purpose.
> 
> Huh?  My point is running ONE DOS app will slowdown the whole
> *Win95* system.  If that's good enough for you fine, I will stick
> with OS/2 which *can* multitask DOS apps *without* the whole
> system slowing down.

I am sorry but a computer running two tasks is slower than a computer
running 1 task.  Even if the tasks are relatively light.


-- 
Mark Rogers.
- Founder member of VFF - Veggie Freedom Fighters.
- Campaign for humain treatment of vegetables (including lettuce).