Re: The true meaning of notebook computers

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures! wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

***   Boy, do I ever agree with that. If the market drove computer sales,
DOS would still be a major contender. Microsoft had to kill it in order to
get their monopolistic Windows into the number one position.

   I remember a report from 1996. It stated that ~65 percent of the
marketed CR-ROM software for the previous year (the year WIN 95 came out)
was for *DOS*. So presumably, all other platforms fell into the remaining
~35 percent. Even if the remainder was just for Windows, that still meant
a 2 to 1 ratio.

   One result of this manufacturer-driven marketplace is that consumers
have become stuck with just one manufacturer of the Windows operating
system. With DOS, if one disliked the MS version, one had many others from
which to choose. No so with Windows.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

***   I got rid of bloatware Windoze in 1999 and upgraded everything to
DOS. I have had several people tell me my 500 MHz AMD k2 system runs
faster than their Pentium IV, 2.2 GHz systems. Of course it does, all that
bloat is non-existent in my DR-DOS system.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

***   I see a lot of computer users in the run of a week when I am on
the road. Most people could easily do 90% of what they are doing today on
a 10-year old system - and at the same speed!

Quoted text here. Click to load it

***   I use a modern DOS system so it's slower than `instantaneously'
because I do load a lot of stuff at bootup. I think my main desktop unit
at work takes a minute or so for a cold boot to complete.

         Richard Bonner /

Site Timeline