__/ [ Doug Mentohl ] on Saturday 03 March 2007 18:42 \__
> From: w-clairl Thu Jul 25 19:46:22 1991
> To: billg; bradsi; jimail; jonl; mikehal; paulma; richab; russw; scotto;
> steveb;
> Cc: billmi; cameronm; carls; garygi; julieg; martyta; makemap; rogersw;
> w-clairl; w-pamed
> Subject: StevB press tour trip report (long mail)
>
> Date Thu Jul 25 19:33:28 1991
>
>
>
> 4. The demos of OS/2 were excellent, crashing the system had the
> intended effect -- to FUD OS/2 2.0. People paid attention to the demo
> and were often supprised to our favor. Steve positioned it as --OS/2 not
> "bad" but that from a performance and "robustness" standpoint, it is NOT
> better than Windows. We know the design point, we know what's in it.
>
> Forrester Research is publishing a bullitin tomorrow that says "Ballber
> exploded some"myths" about OS/2: It doesn't run Windows applications
> presently, it's not bullit proof and dependable -- MS was able to
> demonstrate several instances of OS/2 crashing!
>
> http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011107/PX_0860.pdf
When the FSF does live demos of Windows crashing, then we would be playing on
grounds that are level. Until that day, Microsoft remains a company that
relies on malice for its success. And it bashes its rival at the _corporate
level_. Apple does this in adverts, but it's not quite the same. And Apple
is just about as evil, probably even more.
--
~~ Best wishes
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bYsxaMyFV2Y http://youtube.com/watch?v=QNb7gPA1JFk
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Swap: 1036184k total, 543680k used, 492504k free, 35408k cached
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
