🚀 go-pugleaf

In <DEIBG...@news.cis.umn.edu>, Jon <rein...@maroon.tc.umn.edu> writes:
>Well, I went to Best Buy today, intent on checking out OS/2. I 
>was led to a brand new spanking 100 Mhz Pentium IBM, and was 
>demonstrated the ins and outs of OS/2.  I have come to several 
>_personal_ conclusions:
>
>* OS/2 is SLLLLOOOW.  I can do the same stuff in Win95 10 times 
>as fast and that is on a 90 Mhz Pentium! File copying, menu 
>selecting, everything was slower

And how much memory was on the demo system? When I upgradded from
8 MB to 16 MB, i noticed a big difference in how fast OS/2 (almost
night and day).  Try running Win95 with 8 MB and I guarantee it'll be 
slower than a Win95 16 MB system

>* OS/2 doesn't look as good as Win95. The cosmetic appeal is 
>just not there.  

I for one happen to prefer the OS/2 interface cant say much about Win95
but what i've seen and played with from demos of it running at Microcenter, 
i cant stand the win95 look

>OS/2 may be more robust, but Win95 sure has it's qualities. I 
>mean, what is a power user?  I am running a P90 with 16MB, and 
>I am multitasking the following:

>-A file search
>-MS Word
>-Netscape
>-Eudora
>-Slip Connection
>-Virus Shield
>-Powerpoint
>-Visual Basic
>-Free Agent
>-WinZip
>-Paint Shop Pro
>-Solitiare
>-Win-HTTPD Server
>
>Without _any_ slowdown... So, if a "power user" uses more then 
>that, please let me know.  What I'm saying is, I like Win95 
>much much better.

  All that without "any" slowdown, if anyone believs that, I've got a bridge to 
sell you.  And all i'm saying is I like OS/2 much much much better than Win95