🚀 go-pugleaf

cantor@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu (scott eric cantor) writes:

>In article <17mnt5INNdki@agate.berkeley.edu> chiu@ucsee.Berkeley.EDU writes:
>>In article <1992Aug27.113905.19790@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>>
>>>MAC users will love that! I don't know a single MAC user who would give up
>>>their GUI for the Win3.x program manager.......

>	And I don't know too many Windows users who would give up the
>Windows interface for the Mac GUI either.  Note that the interface and
>Program Manager are two different things.  Program Manager sucks, but I
>use other shells.

>>
>>Assuming that Window NT will sport the same interface as Window 3.1, I'm not
>>thrilled (been a both Mac and PC user)

>	I have to agree with this.  Since NT is basically a Windows
>successor, I'd like to see a more object oriented environment.  WPS is OK,
>but it's still a long ways from object oriented.

A long way? OK, there is a lot of discussion about what the term object
oriented means but most people wouldn't say that the wonderful WPS is far
from object oriented.

>>According to a friend who's running Window NT beta, it is slow as hell...
>>(he equated it to Window 3.1 running on 286 with 1MB of RAM) And mind you,
>>he's running Window NT on a 486DX-50 with 32 MB RAM and 1.2 GIG HD...

>	I don't know what the heck your friend's doing, but I can practically
>guarantee you it's something wrong.  We have NT running on a Dell 483/33 with
>16 megs of RAM, and it's performance is certainly acceptable.  It took about
>20+ demo programs running at the same time before we noticed an appreciable
>CPU slowdown.  If you want slow, try OS/2 on a 4 meg 386.

And if you want REALLY slow try the NT alpha (there is no beta yet) on a 4
meg 386.

>	 _______________________________________________________
>	|							|
>	|	Shine on.........				|
>	|			Scott <Crazy Diamond> Cantor	|
>	|							|
>	|	[<<<<<< cantor@cis.ohio-state.edu >>>>>>]	|
>	|_______________________________________________________|