On Oct 20, 2018, at 10:31 AM, Tomasz Rola via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > Oooh. My personal recollection about w95 is that there was a lot of > touting before the premiere day, how advanced it was because "object > oriented operating system”.
[...] > I might have been one of the very few people who not only > understood some of the buzzwords but also was duped into believing > there should be some substance behind them (which maybe makes me > exceptional, just not in a good way). A lot of Windows 95 is implemented using COM, which is probably where the description of it as “object-oriented” comes from. And while I have never been a Windows user, to denigrate it as some sort of non-achievement given the constraints under which it was developed, both in terms of target systems and backwards compatibility, is myopic at best. -- Chris
