On Wed, 05 May 1999, David Woolley wrote:
> On 05-May-99, Robert L. Williamson said
> You do realise that's an oxymoron? :) You've spoken about how PC are faster,
> and I agree with you on that. But you've side stepped the question of the
> so-called Operating System that runs them. Windows is such an awful piece
> of software.
You've fallen into the same trap that I wrote to Robert Williamson
about: the fallacy that Microsoft is the only place you can get an OS for PC
hardware. They're not. Linux, BeOS, *BSD, QNX, etc., etc.
Let's face it, the 80's were the time of hardware proliferation --
everyone had different hardware and each company swore by their architecture.
Then came unification in the form of the IBM PC, and with it, Windows and "OS
unification" -- but that blandness that is so helpful in hardware (by
allowing everyone to choose a computer precicely tailored to their needs
without losing interoperability and paying an arm and a leg for the priviledge
of using "non-standard" hardware) has created a huge backlash when MS tried to
apply it to software. In simple terms: THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES TO WINDOWS.
The Amiga architecture, as it is, is dead. I can only hope, like the
rest of us, that the same isn't true for the OS & the software.
Ben
____________________________________________________________
Voyager Mailing List - Info & Archive: http://www.vapor.com/
For Listserver Help: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "HELP"
To Unsubscribe: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "UNSUBSCRIBE"
