× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  • Subject: Re: Intel delays Merced
  • From: Chuck Lewis <CLEWIS@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 20:30:33 -0400



ericadelong@pmsc.com wrote:

Stuff deleted...

< I recently worked with someone who bought a shiny new PentiumII system,then
promptly reformatted his hard drive and loaded msdos and win 3.11. <GASP> He 
claims
that 16 bit apps are more dependable (fewer crashes). Go figure....>

I NEVER thought I'd be on this side (praising Microsoft - sort of) but I've have
been running NT (on a NOTEBOOK no less !!) for 4 months and there is NO WAY, 
from
what I have seen, that Win 3.11 is more dependable/less crashes - and I'm the 
type
who opens up TONS of stuff and (actually uses everything). I think my NT 
machine has
locked up or crashed MAYBE twice in that time. My Win 3.11 PC did that at LEAST 
once
every other day !!!

IMHO

Chuck

> Eric A DeLong
> ericadelong@pmsc.com
>
> ______________________________ Reply Separator 
>_________________________________
>
> At 10:57 PM 6/2/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >So, if IBM gave Rochester the go-ahead we could see a 128-bit AS/400
> >before Intel gets their lowly little 64-bit chip on the market !   :-)
>
> Neil,
>
> Maybe so.  However the world has been so underwhelmed by 64 bit processing,
> I can't see it getting excited about 96 or 128.
>
> What Rochester failed to do with the 64 bit AS/400 is to deliver any
> splashy applications that clearly could not be duplicated on any other
> processor.
>
> Al
>
>
> Al Barsa, Jr.
> Barsa Consulting, LLC.
>
> (914) 251-9400
> (914) 251-9406 (fax)
>
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
> +---
>
>
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
> +---



+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.