🚀 go-pugleaf

On 9 Jul 1995, Aaron Bilger wrote:

> In article <kspeicht.2...@fox.nstn.ns.ca>,
> Kevin Speichts <kspe...@fox.nstn.ns.ca> wrote:
> >In article <DBC1y...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> rjva...@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Rob Vanden Heuvel) writes:
> >
> >>   After hearing this, it seems to me as though nobody in their right mind would
> >>"upgrade" to Windows 95.  So the alternatives are NT and OS/2.  Seeing as NT
> >>isn't really viable for the home user (unless you have a massively powerful
> >>system) and has such compatibility problems, OS/2 is the clear choice of the
> >>future.
> >
Speaking if NT not being a viable choice, unless you have a massively 
powerful system... isn't that what the P6 is supposed to be???  Win95 
products are REQUIRED to work with NT.  When people get around to moving 
to the more powerful systems, and more powerful os (the majority of 
people), their Win95 Apps 
and games will work fine.  Just a side note... IBM announced that OS/2 
will not be made to support Win95 software.  Of course as usual IBM also 
said that they reserve the right to change their mind at any time.
Perhaps this means nothing to you, since many have already decided 
whether they will go for Os/2 or W95, to me however it means if I choose 
to go with W95 now, I am going to be safe with NT in the future, and the 
interface will be the same (I won't have to learn a new way of operating 
again).  This is what most home users are looking for.  Compatability, 
ease of use, stability in the future (OS/2 has always looked shaky, 
especially when you enter a store and see all three products dedicated to 
it, as compared to the hundreds displayed and activly merchandised for 
win and dos), and finally they like going with software and companies 
they are familiar with (like it or not Microsoft is definatly that).

> 
> Again, a simple lie.  There is no Cairo beta.  Were there such a beta program,

NT with the 95 interface is not Cairo.

What they have been talking about is just an upgrade to NT.