🚀 go-pugleaf

  Among the dozens of other excellent reasons given, who could love a
company that has monopolized the PC world with trash and whose only
decent program is Word (for the Macintosh!!!).  Finally, Word for Windows
2 is a decent port of Word Mac - but it runs under windows, which is
marginally capable of dealing with any above-average hardware!
  SCSI, which should be a standard in all pc's, is problematic to
Windows.  Why the FUCK does this translate to a problem for SCSI's
viability instead of a problem for Microsoft!?  Why is it only
Microsoft software that I see and hear about memory parity errors on
several classes of computers - yet Checkit and others report the
system is fine?!  Why does telling the user that a UAE is really an
unexplained page fault - General protection fault constitute the
elimination of bugs (UAE's) from Windows 3.0 to 3.1?! Why is it the
third part vendors' fault that UAE's occur, when (a) I get them with
nothing but Microsoft Shitware loaded and (b) Microsoft hides features
that are absolutely necessary to perform a function (like real mode
addressing to hardware in 386-enh mode) so that the third party
software vendors have to cheat, lie and steal to get a segment descriptor
that Windows already has but doesn't document?

   In short, Microsoft carries the attitude that they can claim to
serve the most varied hardware platform ever with one release of a shell
over a system monitor, pass it off as an operating system, hide the
features of the system from the user and other (competitor) developers,
and finally blame the hardware & third parties for their shortcomings!

   Too bad OS/2 was so fucking hard to configure for non-IBM hardware.
Sure, I could have gotten it to work & probably would have loved it...
When is Apple going to write System/7 - PC?  What apps run under BSD
freeware Unix?