🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <kremeDB...@netcom.com>,
kr...@netcom.com (Cerebus The Aardvark) wrote:
> Joshua Cyr <jm...@christa.unh.edu> writes:
> >again).  This is what most home users are looking for.  Compatability, 
> >ease of use, stability in the future (OS/2 has always looked shaky, 
> 
> I'm sorry, but this is obviously untrue; if it were the case, the entire
> DOS platform would have imploded about 12 years ago.  There is nothing
> stable, compatible, or easy about MS-DOS.
> 
> Heck, there never has been.
> 
> 
> Os/2 is the superior product, but Bill Gates and the Microsquish propoganda
> machine has been spreading enough cash to get their lies out.
> 
> I'm shocked that people are actually considering purchasing Win95 when they
> know for a fact they willl have to purchase a bug update in a month.

I'm sorry, you're not being realistic. If you say OS/2 is superior in
multitasking, I agree. If you say superior in stability, I agree in certain
cases. But windows 95 is superior in ease of use, ease of installation
plug and play, networking and support by software venders. Also it is most
compatible and has the most hardware support.
All in all OS/2 might be the better product for you, but it is certainly
not superior.



Wim Verveen (wver...@xs4all.nl)      | Generals are in the nice white tent
                                      | on the hill, sipping sancerre
                                      | directing the battle; They are
 http://www.xs4all.nl/~wverveen/      | men of honour             Rimmer