Re: LILO and W95
On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, James D. Freels wrote:
> >"More sense on a PC" ? Duh ! Maybe for a "Win95" user.
> >Anyhow, the problems with "I've installed Micro$oft Windoze 95 on my
> >computer and can't boot Linux anymore" is just due to the fact that
> >M$ just assumes that anyone use their piece of crap and just baldly
> >recreates the MBR.
>
> I know all about the MBR thing. Don;t try to give me that dumb-*^&%
> stuff. Been there, done that...
>
> I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say. Get off your
> high horse just a minute and think about what you are saying.
>
Cool!
>
> P.S. BTW, M$ Windoze-95 is not a piece of crap. I think we all agree
> in this group that it is wowfully behind the capabilities of Linux.
> But, one cannot deny the numbers. If it were that bad, why are there
> so many people using it? We can't isolate ourselves. The thing to do
> is figure out how to work with it.
>
I love these threads, but maybe we should take it off of
debian-user?
I think Win95 really is a piece of crap! In fact, I'd go as
far to say that its a piece of sh*t! The reason its got so
many installations is because of the way Micr$oft
strong armed its corporate user base with support issues
into switching. Although I must say, Win95 is not enjoying
anything like the success of Win3.x. If you think about it,
Windows really is responsible for the PC explosion, so I'm
not really much of a Bill basher. But I also know that
market share is what pushed Win95 onto people's desktops.
Here at Bear we use WinNT exclusively for a Windows platform
(more or less) and have no plans to mess with Win95.
Win95 has forced people into a stronger committment to
Micro$oft, securing future marketshare, etc. It really
doesn't offer much else (other than instalbility and a
learning curve for Win3.x users). The new NT4.0 workstation
will have the same interface and then everyone can upgrade
again. This time, there will be less throw away code, and
an already familiar user interface for Win95 users.
As far as comparing it to Linux/Unix, Window$ is perceived
as being "easier" to install and maintain. Any of us who
have ever had to trouble shoot a Window$ system knows
better, but that's not important. Becuase Window$ is the
platform of choice for most of the computing world, that's
where all major application development efforts are focused.
People don't use really great OS's for the most part. They
use applications they think they need. Everybody wants drag
-n- drop, plug -n- play, point -n- shoot, WYSIWYG, net
aware, multi-media aware/capable, etc. I can do my job on a
vt100 and be basically just as effective, but much of the
world can't read their e-mail without hearing their favorite
jingle and watching an animated icon do a soft shoe across
the screen.
I think I had a point when I started this but I'm sure I've
lost it, so I'll shut up now.
Thanks
Richard G. Roberto
richr@bear.com
201-739-2886 - whippany, nj
--
*******************************************************************************
Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation, offer or
agreement or any information about any transaction, customer account or account
activity contained in this communication.
*******************************************************************************
Reply to: