🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <40m24d$ojm@steel.interlog.com>,
daveacg@interlog.com (Dave Glue) wrote:

[Compress]
> >"Windows 95 - the upgrade of the century"
> 
> It is, for PC users and the PC architecture in general.

That is - almost - an insult. I use OS/2, NT and Linux on
my PC. Windows 95 can't match ANY of them in ANY area (maybe
except for installation, but I've done that already, and
have no problem, so I don't care...)

> >"How to prepare your computer for windows 95:"
> 
> An article telling you what you need to run 95.  God, how disgusting.

Agreed.

> >"Get ready for Windows 95!"
> 
> How to get your machine ready to run 95 optimally.  The gall of these
> magazines!
> 
> Do you really think you'll see anything different with Copland?  

Well, very few of these magazines put on the fron cover:
"Windows 95, a complete failure" and in small prints under
that "Not even ONE of the features MS promissed have been
delivered on".

Why don't they? You see, it would be VERY close to the
truth. Not 100%, but close enough, and most magazines tend
to paint things a bit in black and white.


_______________________________________________________________________
Terje Bergesen - Bergesen Data