🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <415olt$d6@jobes.sierra.net>, rayvd@sierra.net (Ray Van Dolson)
wrote:

> daveacg@interlog.com (Dave Glue) wrote:
> 
> >docjoe@interramp.com (Joe Ragosta) wrote:
> 
> 
> >>> >Mac OS has been 32 bit clean since 5 years ago...
> >>> 
> >>> How long has the Mac been multitasking?
> 
> >>Oh, about 5 or 6 years. How about Windows?
> 
> >Since 3.0.  And unlike the Mac, most Windows applications were
> >co-operative aware 4-5 years ago.
> 
> An OS doing something first doesn't necessarily mean it does it better now.
> Win95/NT and even OS/2 are far superior operating systems to the MacOS System

A glorified DOS-app and a program written by Chinese graduate students
(judging from the broken-English in the dialog boxes) are only "superior"
in terms of numbers of people fooled into using ("fighting with") them.

> 7.5 even if Mac pioneered many of the technologies..  PC OS vendors simply
> took some of the Mac's best points and improved upon them!

Like what?  The only think Windoze & OS/2 got right about the Mac was the
mouse,  and even then they got it bassackwards by connecting it to the
back of the computer chasis instead of into the keyboard where a desktop
pointing device *should* be connected.

> Now we'll see if
> the Mac can keep up (quality wise if not quantiy-wise) with Copland.
> ---
> [Ray Van Dolson | rayvd@sierra.net | IRC: Beaver]
>        [FidoNet: Ray Van Dolson, 1:119/88]

Not surprising how you managed to avoid mentioning "Windows" and "quality"
in the same sentence.  (snicker).

;D

Edward