Nashville vs Detroit - one will stamp out Merlin
Anon
In article <01bb6017.30abcb60$5be943c1@Pbos>, b...@hacom.nl says...
> Hey check this out :::
>
> Have you guys ever herad of Gizeh ???
>
> Well Microsoft is also working on a NEW Windows.
> It's gonna be a 3D 64-bits operating system.
> GUI developed by Disney-experts.
> Icons have a 3D-pyramide look (that's why the codename is : Gizeh)
>
Hmm... how did you find that out? I just read an announcement (ZD
Net 6/96) that they are working on a 64 bit OS. But that OS is 64 bit NT
and the first machine that they are targeting is an Alpha. The time frame
for release is the same as Cario.
BTW while browsing the web I found something hilarious. Remember all the
team O$2 cultists who still advocate O$/2 with spam that says it has more
applications then Win 95 or NT? The ones who insist that you should drop
everything and give IBM all your money because O$/2 has better apps then
anything on a MS OS?
It was a petiton page designed to flood developers with email demanding
O$2 versions of many popular Win 95 applications.
Here is part of a quote lifted from their text..
"I usually try to send an email, but it is such an inconvenience. This
page will contain all of those companies and their email addresses in one
place, requiring only a single click to send a short request for OS/2
development. Easy, right?
If you choose to email any of these developers, I ask that you be polite.
A ranting and raving OS/2 fanatic will not help. Also, you may want to
mention the Developer's API Extentions, which IBM recently released to
make the porting of windows applications very easy. Or perhaps mention
that IBM has sold over 6 million copies of OS/2 Warp since its release,
bringing the total number of OS/2 users to over 12 million.
This list is not so short anymore, but I still urge you to send me the
names of more products that you would like to see developed for OS/2...."
Well at least they found a use for O$2 it can generate useless email to
give the impression that there is a ground swell of demand for a dead OS.
<grin>
Remember no one would have to beg for others to write software for them
if they choosen wisely. I bet there is some Atari user somewhere who
can't understand why Word 95 can't be ported to his obsolete Atari 800.
None of the new OS's to be released this year or next will even boot on
an obsolete 386!
The 64 bit NT will be more capable then the current versions but I am not
going to join a cult demanding someone write software for it. I will wait
and see how it all works out with new technology.
--
Email: 4-ph...@offline.ilinks.net
Rick
>Remember no one would have to beg for others to write software for them
>if they choosen wisely. I bet there is some Atari user somewhere who
>can't understand why Word 95 can't be ported to his obsolete Atari 800.
>None of the new OS's to be released this year or next will even boot on
>an obsolete 386!
Mua-ha-ha-ha!!
Text-pro runs better on my Atari 800xl (and 130xe, and 1200xl, and
600xl and 800) than word95 does on my Pent-133, and has run better for
over a decade! hahaha. obsolete? Never.
Rick
Stormcrow
Hmmm, more OS/2 stuff, isn't this over yet ??? And by the way,
which OS do you want running the air traffic control system when you
are flying ? Or perhaps running the bank that you do business at ???
Rest assured that it is NOT Windows-based... And yes, I DO use
Windows95 for my home use, but that is where it is targeted... So,
back to the age old heated debate.... OS/2 is a better OS for
stability, Windows is better for home-PC and ease of use (however,
anyone who upgraded Win3.11 to Win95 might dispute that "ease of use"
statement...)
4-ph...@offline.ilinks.net (Anon) wrote:
>Remember no one would have to beg for others to write software for them
>if they choosen wisely. I bet there is some Atari user somewhere who
>can't understand why Word 95 can't be ported to his obsolete Atari 800.
>None of the new OS's to be released this year or next will even boot on
>an obsolete 386!
>The 64 bit NT will be more capable then the current versions but I am not
>going to join a cult demanding someone write software for it. I will wait
>and see how it all works out with new technology.
>--
>Email: 4-ph...@offline.ilinks.net
Gandalf the Grey
9 Balrog Way, Moria Gate
Middle Earth
Chip Powell
OS/2 and I found it to be pretty slow when running anything other than
OS/2 apps. Though it is more crash proof than the Win95 OS, remember when
OS/2 2.0 was released, it had more service updates than Novell's Netware
2.0. You need to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. Win95
is not comparable to Win95 but it is comparable to WinNT, and in that
comparison WinNT comes out smelling like a rose, (as appose to OS/2 Warp
which smells like . . . well I just wouldn't suggest sending a dozen to
your spouse). If you want a Win95 desktop with a OS/2 or WinNT bullet
proof OS, you might consider using WinNT 4.0 when it releases in August of
1996. I believe you will be pleased. Oh yes, and all Win95 based
programs will work just the same if not better on WinNT not like OS/2.
Think about it!!!!
Chip Powell
Director of Computer Services
Lincoln Memorial University
pow...@centuryinter.net
Dan Guisinger (QWL)
Get off our newsgroup you warped freak!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--
-=Dan Guisinger=-
Quantum Warp Laboratories
Combat 2045
> gan...@together.net (Stormcrow) wrote in article
<4qpnsf$7...@bristlecone.together.net>...