🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3qf5d6$e...@odin.diku.dk> kr...@diku.dk (Mikkel R. Jakobsen) writes:
>From: kr...@diku.dk (Mikkel R. Jakobsen)
>Subject: Re: Win95: Been there, done that.
>Date: 30 May 1995 13:08:54 GMT

>khc...@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu  (Oliver Chung) writes:

>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>>In <801269...@euronet.demon.co.uk>, Mike Flex <fl...@euronet.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>
>>>>That's not it either.  OS/2 is a better platform to run windows programs
>>>>on than windows.  I believe it's the preload thing.
>>>
>>>   Never let an OS get in the way of what you're doing.
>>>
>>>   I have two sound card in my machine. OS/2 (half an operating system?)
>>>   couldn't see either of them. Win'95 detected all hardware perfectly,
>>>   and it worked first time, I was gobsmacked.

>>I don't know why, but when people blames OS/2 for not doing
>>something, the specifics are almost always not posted (what
>>soundcards are you using?)

>Well, my problem was that OS/2 didn't recognize my UltraSound. I guess
>it hasn't got support for MPU-401 either?!

>Anyway, some say it's not IBM's fault that they don't have drivers for
>a lot of hardware, that it isn't their job to write drivers. Well, that
>excuse sucks! What matters is that end-users expect support for more
>than just two soundcard manufacturers'. I, as a user, don't care HOW
>it will support my GUS. I just don't want to go buy a Creative Labs sound-
>card (and a whole bunch of memory modules) so I can run OS/2. No way!

>>Let me guess, you have a SB "compatible" and a GUS, right?

>Oh, so now we scorn those users who happen to have a "compatible"?! :)


>Mikkel.
>-- 
>+--------------------------------------------------+
>|     Mikkel Jakobsen     Dept of Computer Science |
>|      kr...@diku.dk      University of Copenhagen |
>| mik...@chrom.imbg.ku.dk         Denmark          |

you suck!