[SATLUG] Fair Comparisons?!?!

[country]

haha, try an ME machine....     BSOD heaven... hahahahahah

Sean Ward wrote:

>The blue screen of death was so common on Win95 and Win98 machines that
>it warranted its own acronym. NT was much more stable, and I have yet to
>see the BSOD on a WIN2K box. 
>
>Sean 
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: satlug-admin at satlug.org [mailto:satlug-admin at satlug.org] On Behalf
>Of Larry Blodgett
>Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 4:01 PM
>To: satlug at satlug.org
>Subject: Re: [SATLUG] Fair Comparisons?!?!
>
>Who are those Linux advocates?  I searched the satlug archives and 
>could not find any comparisons there.  There was a mention, that DOS 
>was command line and you can use a command line in Linux.  They both 
>use video monitors and keyboards.  As I recall (could be wrong, it 
>has been a while) Win95 was still a poor gui front end on DOS.
>
>Maybe the comparison was that DOS hardly ever crashed and Linux 
>almost never crashes (could that be it?).  The blue screen of death 
>was a nice new feature of the Microsoft Windows development process.
>
>I just happen to see one on a co-workers screen running Windows 2000. 
>They commented what a nice shade of blue had been chosen.  Linux can 
>also produce some nice shades of blue, but not to signify the system 
>has fallen apart.
>
>
>  
>
>>Got a question for some of you more experienced Linux (Lin-nuks) gurus.
>>Why are Linux advocates always comparing Linux to M$-DOS? I think most
>>people would agree its like comparing the space shuttle to a piper cup.
>>But who even uses DOS anymore except for an occasional Tracert & Ping.
>>
>>I went all up and down the isles of CompUSA and Best Buy and didn't
>>    
>>
>find
>  
>
>>even one game or application that ran on DOS.
>>
>>Besides didn't they stop development on it about the time Win95 came
>>out?
>>
>>Your Feedback please
>>
>>- Eric
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.satlug.org/pipermail/satlug/attachments/20020815/eecca164/attachment-0001.htm