On Fri, 01 Feb 2002 20:03:11 -0400, Clarence Verge wrote: > On Fri, 1 Feb 02 16:38:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (howard schwartz) > wrote:
>> With all the talk of what a relief it is to switch to Linux, I just could >> not resist this one: > < more than one snipped > >> The only major factor against [DOS] I can think of is that it is ``old'' -- >> development has mostly stopped except for embedded systems. But so what? > Exactly ! >> End of emotional rant > It's nice to see someone else ranting about DOS for a change. I'll rant, I like to rant. I started on computers at school last spring, found out they put me in the wrong class, I was 2 ahead of where I was supposed to be. I had to learn windows office 2000 the same day I learned left click, right click. I spent most of my time trying to figure out all these odd, arbitrary Ikons, that didn't look anything like they meant. My second class, they had me installing DOS, NT4, Slackware, and Red Hat. The first two were hard enough, especially since I didn't know what a DOS was, and everyone else knew it and this thing called Unix. The DOS freaked me out at first, where the %$&* are the pictures! The last two were a nightmare, I didn't know what to make of that, it looked the same, but it didn't install the same. Last summer I was given a computer, it barely supports win95 but free. But it does support DOS just fine. I found out I can read better than figure out someone elses idea of a graphical symbol. I do most my stuff in windoze2000 but much prefer DOS, to me DOS is newer than 2000. 2000 tells me what to do, I tell DOS what to do. If I knew programming, I could tell it a lot more. It's small, fast, and efficient, that's all I need. Enough ranting; Rob: -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/ -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
