Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bill-gates,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.win95.misc,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,alt.org.team-os2,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.hawaii.edu!ames!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!usenet.etri.re.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!bofh.dot!usenet.seri.re.kr!bofh.dot!news.cais.net!news.mathworks.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!EU.net!sun4nl!news From: cbrace@lim.nl (Colin Brace) Subject: Re: Why no M$ AppleScript or Rexx imitations? X-Nntp-Posting-Host: asp98-7.amsterdam.nl.net Message-ID: <DsFz2F.GrA@solair1.inter.NL.net> Sender: news@solair1.inter.NL.net (News at news) Reply-To: cbrace@lim.nl (Colin Brace) Organization: NLnet X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5 References: <4mlpnf$d4p@sidhe.memra.com> <petrichDs5Fv9.5Cr@netcom.com> <4ohcuv$772@ari.ari.net> <4op27j$igq@newnews.iafrica.com> <4osmh3$25t@panix3.panix.com> Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 20:47:03 GMT Lines: 34 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au alt.fan.bill-gates:22923 comp.os.ms-windows.nt.misc:108758 comp.os.ms-windows.win95.misc:145169 comp.os.os2.advocacy:207155 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:111259 comp.os.linux.advocacy:50935 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:20612 In <4osmh3$25t@panix3.panix.com>, jbrock@panix.com (John Brock) writes: >In article <4op27j$igq@newnews.iafrica.com>, >Chris Quirke <cquirke@iafrica.com> wrote: > >>kiyoinc@kiyoinc.com wrote: > >>>When Microsoft builds hardware what do you get? A mouse and keyboard! >> >>>When IBM builds hardware what do you get? Robot tape libraries that >>>hold Terabytes of data, fibre optic data connections that run at >>>hundreds of mega bytes per second, un-interruptable, remotely >>>maintainable, parallel, redundant, mirrored, archived, restorable, >>>failsafe. Hardware that runs for decades. CPU's that can be maintained >>>and upgraded while the operating system is running production work. > >>Can almost forgive them CGA, under-clocked processors, MCA, PS/1 with >>DOS 4 in ROM, recent "why buy a clone?" PC-300 systems without L2 >>cache, and all those artificial incompatabilities introduced to >>differentiate the market and so allow huge markups where no >>competition exists... > >Just for the record, I bought my IBM PC 300 a year ago, and it has a >256KB L2 cache. It was an option though, and I had to pay extra for >it, but if I hadn't bought it then I could have upgraded later. And, >also for the record, I *like* my IBM PC 300! :-) The cache was not included with low-end processors (486-25) but was with faster ones (486-100). I have a PC 300, too, and am quite happy with it. Very quiet. -------------------------------------- Colin Brace <cbrace@lim.nl>