🚀 go-pugleaf

On 1 Jan 1996 03:54:23 GMT, zool@outland.cyberwar.com (Joshua Galun)
wrote:

>David Corn (dcorn@metronet.com) wrote:
>: > <snip> 
>: >> This is not unique to the Macintosh. Minor OS revisions often have 
>: >> performance improvements: Win3.0 -> 3.1, OS/2 2.0 -> 2.1, WinNT 3.1 -> 
>: >> 3.5, ... Win96/97 will probably have better performance than 95.
>: >> 
>: > 
>: > What a crock.:-)  Everyone knows that everytime MS upgrades that bloated
>: >OS called Windows, it gets slower. If it didn't, the clone fans wouldn't
>: >be drooling all over Pentium Pros.
>
>: Try WinNT 3.5 for the most obvious example.  :)
>
>: > Now the Amigas OS (OTHO) does get faster with updates. Anyone going from
>: >AmigaOS 1.3 to 3.1 can tell you that the performance of their system
>: >improved. Anyone going from Win2 to Win(whatever) can tell you of hardware
>: >upgrade stories.
>
>: Not necessarily.  The examples he gave were all correct.
>
>	you cannot say that all the examples he gave were correct after 
>agreeing that his example of Windows speeding up in upgrades was 
>incorrect.  

Uh...huh?  I agreed that he was correct - WinNT 3.5 is significantly
faster than WinNT3.1, for example.  I'll rephrase my above line to
read - "Try WinNT 3.5 for the most obvious example of how he's right."
- Better?