🚀 go-pugleaf

gior...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

: I don't trust your "facts." How can you (or your "facts") say that the
: P6 will only be 10% faster than the Pentiums of today
: (P75/90/100/120/133)? That's ridiculous. If it's true, then nobody
: will buy the P6, and Intel will be out of business. I don't think
: Intel is that stupid.

They will only be 10% faster using OS's with a significant amout of 16 
bit code in them, like Win'95 and 3.1 (I have a feeling DOS wouldnt slow 
it down, when using a DOS extender like DOS4GW, but I'm not really sure)

: Furthermore, the reason that people aren't using OS/2 Warp or 
: especially Windows 3.5 NT en masse is because they are not as
: compatible with DOS and Windows 3.1x programs as Windows 95.

I agree on the NT side, but I've had few problems with compatibility on 
the OS/2 side.

: I used to be sympathetic to people like you (people who "promote"
: OS/2) but people like you have just overdone it. I DO want Microsoft
: to have competition; Microsoft should have 50% of the market and IBM
: should have the other 50% of the market. Your post is "HUGE NEWS" only
: to people who want Windows 95 to fail, no matter what!

I'd say it was "huge news" if I bought a 80 Mhz P6 (for example) and was 
running Win'95, only to find that it ran apps slower than a P590 (which 
it will, if using Win'95)

What actually suprises me is that PC Magazine printed this.  Lord knows 
PC mag has been historically anti-OS/2.  (Although I suppose this isnt so 
much pro OS/2 as anti-Win'95)

Could they actually just be printing the facts this time, or is another 
clever MS ruse, this time aimed at selling more copies of NT at $300 a pop?

-Dan

--
My inner child is a mean little fucker.
http://www.unm.edu/~dehrig/dan3.html