🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <01bcc826$2a265940$29f510cf@maxpug>, "M. Kilgore"
<mkilgore@NOSPAM.prysm.net> wrote:

> Willie Yeo <yeo@pigeon.qut.edu.au> wrote in article
> <608d9n$q6g@dove.qut.edu.au>...
>         And yes, I know COMMAND.COM and I *HATE* it. GUI is great to 
> > navigate CLIs. I know you want to show that M$ is great, but Win 95 just 
> > isn't. It's a crappy OS with solid marketing strategy that corners the 
> > market. I wave my white flag to Win NT, but if you don't believe me, just
> 
> > ask the M$ engineers what Windows 95 really is. It's an IMPROVED Win 3.11
> 
> > on MS-DOS shell with 32-bit extensions.
> > 
> >       I have a Windows NT workstation at work, a PowerMac with DOS 
> > Compatibility (Windows 95) at home, a SunSparc Station at home, and I 
> > *HATE* Windows 95. Windows NT is far superior, but my MacOS 8 is better 
> > then Win NT IMHO, but then again, NT has its advantages over MacOS.
> 
> If I remember the hype & speculation before Win95, MS created Win95 as a
> reudced NT in order to transition users from Win3.x &WG to NT by planting
> the seeds to make users start thinking of NT. Frankly, I'm surprised that
> Win98 was even developed in the first place... I guess that Win95 offered
> too much on it's own merits or MS found that not everyone can handle the
> more complicated NT.
> 
> From a programming standpoint, Win95 doesn't sit on top of DOS. I think
> that MS would drop DOS if they could but the large number of games,
> shareware, etc. makes such a thing hard to do without pissing a bunch of
> people off.
> 
> Just out of curiosity, why aren't you running NT on your powerbook?


Ummm, I dunno, because NT doesn't run on macs. Actually, if Microsoft make
some effort with NT for PPC, you would have a really great combination. A
great operating system (from the performance standpoint, not from ease of
use or reliability) which would finally cast off the ancient x86 chip
architecture that retards so much of the PC world.

-- 
"C:\ONGRTLNS.W95"