🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3us9re$a...@alpha.wright.edu>, iyo...@alpha.wright.edu (Ian
Young) writes:
>
> Msg-ID: <3us9re$a...@alpha.wright.edu>
> References: <3ur5qs$f8_...@line04.socketis.net>
> Posted: 22 Jul 1995 21:49:34 -0400
>
> Org.  : Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio 45435
>
> Jody Cooper (jco...@socketis.net) wrote:
> > In article <DC3Fq...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>,
> >    rjva...@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Rob Vanden Heuvel) wrote:
>
> > >Yet Microsoft has achieved compatibility which, by all reports on this
> > >newsgroup at least, are no better than OS/2s.  Now seeing that OS/2 is
> > >a fully 32-bit OS, please explain to me again why it was so necessary
> for
> > >Win95 to use so much 16-bit code?  Hmmm?
>
> > Two words:  Backwards Compatibility.
>
> Um... I thought we'd already established that the incompatible list for
> OS/2's windows support is no longer than the incompatible list for Win95
>
> I think the real reason is : "Because otherwise we'd might as well sell
> WindowsNT."
>
> which is what we're hearing now anyway.
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Jody Cooper                                  EMail:
> jco...@socketis.net
> > ToastWare, Inc.
>
> --
> Ian G. Bull Young               |"sometimes, even music cannot
> iyo...@alpha.wright.edu         |substitute for tears" -Paul Simon
> "The guy who tries to be funny, |"The Way is empty, yet
> but everbody laughs at"         |use will not drain it.  -Lao Tzu
>
>
>
>


Can you PLEASE take this damn debate to another group? Are people stupid or
something? This is the comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action GROUP! I came here to
read about games, not some stupid OS debating/flame war's!