Roger!
In a message to Joe Siegler you wrote:
 RF> one such person.  .  I wish that one day, these
 RF> Microsoft-bashers would come to grips with the fact that Windows is
 RF> here to stay, and that game companies have to make money by writing
 RF> for the OS most of the public uses!
    Actually, although I do like Win95 (when it's not crashing or making me 
look at an hourglass for ten minutes at a stretch), I also have to make a DOS 
vs Windows observation.  If you agree that having more RAM available (not 
used by other programs) will help a game run more smoothly, then why would 
you want to buy more RAM, then kill that benefit by running your 
game-of-choice under a memory hog like Windows?  Simply by running it under 
Win instead of DOS you've effectively killed off several megs of available 
RAM (about 4meg with Win95).  Think how much smoother your game would run 
under an OS that takes a few hundred K instead of 4 megs.  Not to mention an 
OS that'll just let the game run instead of one that stops and checks all of 
its resources every fifteen seconds or so.
    Sorry, this is getting WAY too off-topic.  I just wanted to point out 
that there are some good reasons for preferring a DOS-based game to a 
Win-based one without being a Windows basher!
Later,
   Jack
--- 
---------------