🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <33305cf6.0@usamrid.isd.net>, chucks@isd.net (Erik Funkenbusch) writes:
|> In article <333008b1.0@news.essex1.com>, bgqhr!drrdw0.bnl (Chris J. Alumbaugh) wrote:
|> >What a lame, ignorant post, from someone who defends a certain other
|> >software company whose dismal record on ship dates is overshadowed only by
|> >horror stories of ~43 yr old "lost" letters from the postal service.  IBM
|> >has "delievered" quite a bit of the technologies that are the computer you
|> >are running, and let's see,, Microsoft made a mouse and BOB and a some
|> >other stuff that  I have even a lower opinion of.  Yeah, I guess Microsoft
|> >delievered on Windows 95 and active X and IE,, but I got to say, I'll take
|> >"dead" IBM technology ANY day over what MS dellievered. Can you say
|> >CAIRO=1994??  Wouldn't happen to have a harddrive with PMRL technology
|> >would you?
|> 
|> Excuse me?  NT 3.1 didn't even come out until 1993, Cairo wasn't even planned 
|> until 1994.  How the hell could it have been late before it was even 
|> announced?
|> 
|> Fact is, the vast majority of MS products are delivered ON TIME or *EARLY*.

MS rarely ever delivers on time, and if they do it is too buggy to
be of any use.

I don't recall exactly when Cairo was announced and what the scheduled shipping
date was, but it has past for a while now and cairo has been moved from an
OS version to a technology collection (to not show how late it really is).

Parts of Cairo are available now, much is still missing, well over a year
after it should have been available.

Win95 should have been out at the end of 93.

Win97 should have been out by now.

NT 5.0 should be out RSN but is delayed unitl 98.

Office was almost on track and is infested with bugs so that even the mags
advise to sit it out.

I really cannot think of a single MS product which was on time or early,
please name some

 -Mike