AMIGA OS is much better than Windows XP!!!
Victor Smootbank
Windows XP is one of the crappiest operating systems ever
made. It was probably written in BASIC on a Sinclair ZX81.
AMIGA OS is still much better, even the oldest versions of
AMIGA OS are still better than any version of Windows.
For example, the AMIGA always had real multitasking and
no multi-crashing that's so typical for Windows. The AMIGA
always had long filenames. And so on.
AMIGA OS is so much better than Windows XP. Better burn
your Windows CD and get an AMIGA with AMIGA Os. Even
an ancient AMIGA 500 is much better than any Windows XP
machine!!!
tom
> Windows is rubbish, all versions of Windows are utter crap and
> Windows XP is one of the crappiest operating systems ever
> made. It was probably written in BASIC on a Sinclair ZX81.
So many experts........with so many soapboxes.
Bogdan Macri
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bogdan Macri - Photography & Consulting
bogdan dot macri at geemail dot com
Fjiluk The Hogfish-Beater
> Windows is rubbish
I agree!
Damian
Post this into a PONG group. It has no business being in an OS group.
Payton Byrd
"Fjiluk The Hogfish-Beater" <Fji...@hogfish.orq> wrote in message news:1ab278....@news.alt.net...
> On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:10:32 -0700, Victor Smootbank wrote:
>
>> Windows is rubbish
>
> I agree!
>
Of all the groups I subscribe to, I figured this is the one where someone would take the bait when this guy got around to trolling it.
Klompmeester
"Damian" <nos...@rabid-dog.net> wrote in message
news:470abfc2$0$47142$892e...@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
You rate XP that low?
Damian
How did you develop that conclusion? I said an amiga post belongs in a PONG
group, not a Windows OS group.
Sue Ridge
"Victor Smootbank" <mean_p...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1191881432.1...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
and the figures are..............
Klompmeester
No you didn't, and I'm reading this in an Amiga newsgroup you fucking
dickhead.
Klompmeester
"Sue Ridge" <nos...@2daybtinternet.com> wrote in message
news:Y9idnSfLAIY9ipba...@bt.com...
Irrelevant?
Sam Smith
>
> and the figures are..............
Slim and sexy?
Sam Smith
>> You rate XP that low?
>
> How did you develop that conclusion? I said an amiga post belongs in a PONG
> group, not a Windows OS group.
>
Really? You sure that's what you mean?
Damian
>
> I'm reading this in an Amiga newsgroup you fucking
> dickhead.
So does that make you a PONG Master or something?
Klompmeester
No, just a bit more enlightened then yourself.
GX100
"Victor Smootbank" <mean_p...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1191881432.1...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
Fishing again F/Wit?
Damian
Did you mean "than", unenlightened one?
Mr Wocfry
no alternative to report you to the world spelling council, and they
will come and get you.
And you will not like that.
Damian
There was no spelling error identified, it was incorrect word usage.
Nevermind, you obviously couldn't understand anyway.
chrisv
Makes one wonder if everyone in the Pong group is so dense, doesn't it.
Klompmeester
"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:470be337$0$9857$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
Another ignoranus enters the discussion from the PONG group.
Klompmeester
The state of ones enlightenment is not judged by that spelling of ones
second language, but in the message it purveys.
relic
> "Damian" <nos...@rabid-dog.net> wrote in message
> news:470bce9d$0$47154$892e...@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
>> Klompmeester wrote:
>>> "Damian" <nos...@rabid-dog.net> wrote in message
>>> news:470ba353$0$47148$892e...@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
>>>> Klompmeester wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm reading this in an Amiga newsgroup you fucking
>>>>> dickhead.
>>>>
>>>> So does that make you a PONG Master or something?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, just a bit more enlightened then yourself.
>>
>> Did you mean "than", unenlightened one?
>>
>
> The state of ones enlightenment is not judged by that spelling of ones
> second language, but in the message it purveys.
As previously stated, there was nothing posted about a spelling error.
Klompmeester
"relic" <bogus....@cjb.net> wrote in message
news:470c486a$0$9582$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
"then" was misspelt was it not?
Damian
No, that's the correct spelling of 'then'. How do you spell it???
Damian
That's how I spell 'then', but since there was no "time" relationship
involved, 'then' is incorrect usage. You made a comparison, you need to use
'than':
I'm going to the store "then" to a movie.
The movie was a sequel that was better "than" the original.
Damian
That is correct, it was a word usage error.
Klompmeester
Not in the context I used it in, it should have been spelt "than".
Klompmeester
Except I placed an "e" where the "a" should have been. It was misspelt,
since I'm quite aware of the difference between "then" and "than".
Toad
> Windows is rubbish, all versions of Windows are utter crap and
> Windows XP is one of the crappiest operating systems ever
> made. It was probably written in BASIC on a Sinclair ZX81.
>
> AMIGA OS is still much better, even the oldest versions of
> AMIGA OS are still better than any version of Windows.
>
> For example, the AMIGA always had real multitasking and
> no multi-crashing that's so typical for Windows. The AMIGA
> always had long filenames. And so on.
>
> AMIGA OS is so much better than Windows XP. Better burn
> your Windows CD and get an AMIGA with AMIGA Os. Even
> an ancient AMIGA 500 is much better than any Windows XP
> machine!!!
Sounds great. Where can I get it ? How much does it cost ? Will it run
on my Intel based PC ?
Toad
--
Klompmeester
"Toad" <to...@sky.net> wrote in message
news:SCVPi.1531$K7....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
Download WinUAE and scrounge around for KS and WB files and you can then run
Amiga OS faster then any real classic Amiga. Alternatively you could buy
Cloanto's Amiga Forever which includes all the Kickstart ROM's etc and is
fully legal.
MalcolmO
> AMIGA OS are still better than any version of Windows.
Nope. I'm a big Amiga booster. I might even say a somewhat well-known
one. ;) But your statement's just not so. You can't stick a floppy into
an XP machine and have it crash the machine. That _did_ happen on the
oldest versions of the Amiga OS.
In fact, XP doesn't crash often. Certainly much less than Workbench 1.2
or 1.3.
That said, I'm still sold on Ami.
Klompmeester
"MalcolmO" <us...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
news:ff43qp$6p7$1...@aioe.org...
In fact *any* version of AmigaOS.
> That said, I'm still sold on Ami.
I'm a fan in the retro and hobbyist sense but I'm also enough of a realist
to know that AmigaOS is well past viability on a practical level.
MalcolmO
> to know that AmigaOS is well past viability on a practical level.
Only cause the hardware's not there.
Klompmeester
"MalcolmO" <us...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
>> I'm also enough of a realist to know that AmigaOS is well past viability
>> on a practical level.
>
> Only cause the hardware's not there.
And the software is hopelessly out of date, buggy or simply inadequate by
todays standards.
The OS too has many shortcomings compared to the current mainstream
operating systems.
MalcolmO
> todays standards.
>
> The OS too has many shortcomings compared to the current mainstream
> operating systems.
Do you know that? How?
WB 2.0 was pretty good. Very good, in fact. And probably all of the
versions were WAY better than the competition in those days.
There have been revs of the OS since then. What happened? I don't know!
Probably they put in protected memory, which was the downfall of Win,
Mac AND Ami in those days. What else? I don't know!
Klompmeester
"MalcolmO" <us...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
>> And the software is hopelessly out of date, buggy or simply inadequate by
>> todays standards.
>>
>> The OS too has many shortcomings compared to the current mainstream
>> operating systems.
>
> Do you know that? How?
Virtually no new software.
No new hardware.
No memory protection.
Nothing like the features and stability you get with any other OS out there.
No support for leading edge hardware.
Poor to no support for trailing edge hardware.
Lack of developers, development and support.
> WB 2.0 was pretty good. Very good, in fact. And probably all of the
> versions were WAY better than the competition in those days.
But still very unstable. OS/2 was pretty good too, and certainly more
stable.
> There have been revs of the OS since then. What happened? I don't know!
> Probably they put in protected memory, which was the downfall of Win, Mac
> AND Ami in those days. What else? I don't know!
Mostly bug fixes and patches incorporated into the OS and assorted
crippleware added.
And still as unstable as hell.
Daniel Mandic
> Windows is rubbish, all versions of Windows are utter crap and
> Windows XP is one of the crappiest operating systems ever
> made
What a crappy world ;-)
(are you mad, or what?) /me Deep AMIGA Enthusiast!!! Best Soundchip
ever! etc.
--
Daniel Mandic