🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action
Article #3531

Re: Windows 95 & Microsoft (vs OS/2?) : long but IMHO good! :-)

#3531
From: ko... Ka On Lee
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 00:00
51 lines
3398 bytes
Do you know what really *hold* me off from Win95?  The stupidness of
Windows advocate like this one:  make 9 post in order to make a few
points and make some insult.  

Ken (x...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>[...]
> The fact is that Win95 runs out of the box with much more hardware
> than OS/2.

Don't count on it.  My friend's 32bit IDE device driver refuse to run
under Win95, complaining about "IDE controller not found".  Win95 is
supposed to replace his old diver with a Win95 one, right?  Now he's
running it as a normal IDE drive.

> The fact is that Win95 runs my win3.11 software faster that win3.11 or
> OS/2. (graphics intensive and disk intensive apps that benefit from
> the new video/disk drivers.

The test of PC World tells the other way:  Win95 is a bit slower than
Win3.1 for Win16 apps.  May be they use old builds?

> The fact is that Win95 will be the easiest upgrade to a modern OS for
> the VAST majority of windows users. I all the testing we did at AT&T
> and Bell labs for a new OS... Win95 installed with NO tweaking on much
> much much more hardware than OS/2. It was a almost "no brain" change
> interface wise, needing no re-training in most cases.

I have never use OS/2, but the Win95 interface confuse the hell out of
me in the first hour test on my friends machine and I am a 4 years
windows veteran.  Those short cut thing is stupid.  I have to open
Explorer, right click to creat a short cut, find the new short cut
from the long file list and drag it to the place I want.  And finally
click on the name to change "Short cut to XYZ.EZE" to something
meaningful.  There should be one single command like "creat a short
cut on Desktop and use the right name".

I also found myself go back to DOS prompt more often than Win3.1
because Exporer need to read the whole directory, and some command are
difficult to reach like "sort by type" or "diskcopy".

> The fact is that the amount of windows 95 software will far exceed all
> the OS/2 software :)

Let's hope they are quality software, not some half hacks which rush
out to capture the Win95 market.

           |  _  |                      Ka On Lee
           |_(0)_|			
 ------==<[\-(.)-/]>==------            ko...@chat.carleton.ca
        ^ \#/o o\#/ ^                   al...@freenet.carleton.ca
           '     `
Technical Details
Message-ID: <DC39uB.3q7@cunews.carleton.ca>
Path: mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <3t91i2$3gt@oslo-nntp.eunet.no> <3t99np$74c@onramp.arc.nasa.gov> <3t9e83$f4q@oslo-nntp.eunet.no> <3t9oft$85n@onramp.arc.nasa.gov> <DB84JC.4nq@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> <3tf6g5$atg@seymour.sfu.ca> <DBBu9L.Av6@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> <3t

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
From: ko...@chat.carleton.ca (Ka On Lee)
Subject: Re: Windows 95 & Microsoft (vs OS/2?) : long but IMHO good! :-)
Date: 1995/07/21
Message-ID: <DC39uB.3q7@cunews.carleton.ca>
X-Deja-AN: 106703195
sender: ne...@cunews.carleton.ca (News Administrator)
x-nntp-posting-host: arena.carleton.ca
references: <3t91i2$3gt@oslo-nntp.eunet.no> <3t99np$74c@onramp.arc.nasa.gov> <3t9e83$f4q@oslo-nntp.eunet.no> <3t9oft$85n@onramp.arc.nasa.gov> <DB84JC.4nq@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> <3tf6g5$atg@seymour.sfu.ca> <DBBu9L.Av6@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> <3t
followup-to: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
organization: Carleton University
newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit