Re: Argumenty: Co zamiast Windows 95?

Autor: Gregorio Kus (Grego_at_RMnet.it)
Data: Sat 08 Mar 1997 - 11:56:33 MET


pozwole sobie wrzucic Wam jeszcze jeden swiezy cytacik prosto z internetu:

>>Lou Gerstner (IBM CEO):
>>>"IBM's goal is first and foremost to continue to develop OS/2 as the
>>>premier OS for large corporate users including our current customers and
>>>.others who see the advantages of OS/2 as a platform for running
>>>mission-critical applications. We will do this by aiding them in
>>>maintaining existing applications and developing and integrating new
>>>software end technologies as appropriate."

>>What gets me is, one of OS/2 strongest areas (and biggest selling
>>points) is in "mission critical" situations. Well... how do you define
>>"mission critical"? For a secretary, not having your word processor
>>crash out from under a large document would seem to be fairly
>>"mission-critical". For an accountant, wouldn't keeping the
>>spreadsheet up and running without problems be "mission-critical"? Why
>>does "mission critical" have to be relegated only to bank machines and
>>nuclear power plant control systems? Seems to me, what's "critical"
>>depends largely on what one's mission is.

>Yes! This is the most frustrating part of the situation: according to IBM,
>only banks, insurance companies, etc. deserve a stable OS and the rest of us
>are doomed to Windows? If nothing else, this is an incredibly patronizing
>attitude: "you're not good enough for OS/2".

pozdrawiam wszystkich nie dosc dobrych aby uzywac OS/2

Grego

--
/-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gregorio Kus         Grego_at_RMnet.it           Grego_at_cyberspace.org
ROMA, Italy          2ndAdmin_at_iName.com       Grego_at_FreeNet.hut.fi
Anonymous Mail Service - http://free.rmnet.it/~grego/AnonMail.html


To archiwum zostało wygenerowane przez hypermail 2.1.7 : Tue 18 May 2004 - 15:58:01 MET DST