Alexander Skwar wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 04:47:21PM -0600, cjulwelling wrote:
> > heh heh... I have had about the exact opposite luck as you. 7.0 died all
> > the time on me where as 2000 has never crashed once... for me and I've had
oh come on, be honest now :) nobody has that other operating system without
crashes. are u posting this on all your own or did SOMEONE put u up to it :)
>
>
> Well, even if I wanted to, I couldn't try W2k, because my ISDN card, that
> worked perfectly fine (as long as something can work perfectly under
> Windoze) isn't even supported by W2k. And as long as there's no hardware
> support for an OS, it is no alternative to switch to.
>
> I'm running Linux for the last 3-4 years now, and don't remember when it
> last crashed. Windows NT I never tried at home, because I don't have a
> license for that. I don't care about it actually. And the only OS that I
> have license for (besides Linux obviously) is W98. And W98 is extremely
> unstable and with bad hardware suppport. E.g. it won't run my monitor at
> 1152x864 at 100Hz, where Linux does this pretty well.
>
> So, if someone really suggests to use Windoze, he can't have a clue. At
> least that's my experience.
>
> > they both have weaknesses and strengths and I also enjoy having 4 OS's on my
> > computer( Be, Linux, 2k, 98). : )
>
> Not that it is any of my business, but what do you need 4 OS's for? W2k and
> Linux I can imagine, yes. But why 98 and Be? I personally need only one
> OS. BTW: Haven't tried Be yet, no hardware support for my ISDN card; no
> support == bad OS.
>
> Alexander Skwar
> --
> Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com
> Sichere Mail? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] fuer GnuPG Keys
> ICQ: 7328191
