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

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

Article #943

Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action Previous Next

#943

From: for...
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 00:00

10 lines
1200 bytes

> : >> releasing a bug free, stable product.  Windows 3.1 was more stable than
> : >> OS/2 2.1. 

Pure FUD.

I used both at the time, and OS/2 was far better.  W 3.1 was forever generating
global protection faults.

Regards,
Euan

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1995Jul11.200119@cantva>

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> <3tg4mr$hia@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

From: for...@csc.canterbury.ac.nz
Subject: Re: Windows 95 & Microsoft (vs OS/2?) : long but IMHO good! :-)
Date: 1995/07/11
Message-ID: <1995Jul11.200119@cantva>
X-Deja-AN: 105992604
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> <3tg4mr$hia@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com>
organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
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
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

Reply to Parent Message