Hello Stephen.

11 Dec 02 11:11, you wrote to me:

 MM>> Win 98 is about as stable as a herd of buffalo perched on a
 MM>> teeter-totter, eh?

 SM> Well, I don't want to tempt fate but, aside from the occasional "blue
 SM> screen of death" incident, it's liveable.  'Course the
"minor detail"
 SM> is that I'm not running 24/7...

Pity those of us who /have/ to run Win 98 24/7...

 SM> Still, the one thing that might worry me is that Win98 regularly
 SM> has trouble managing the apparently difficult "shut down"
 SM> process.  Go figure, eh?

Could be related to USB. Win 98 has trouble with that.

 SM> In the interest of dragging myself back on topic I'm going to
 SM> skip over most your feedback on Windows XP versus Windows NT,
 SM> other than a quick "thank you."

You're gronkcome.

 MM>>>> some relief from the annoying crashing of windows, though, by
 MM>>>> employing it's cousin, NT. Now at least I can sleep at night
 MM>>>> without worrying if the crashing windows left glass all over my
 MM>>>> keyboard, eh?

 SM> I'm happy for you.  Learning to coexist with your computer's inner
 SM> daemons can sometimes take the patience of a Zen master.  Congrats!

Although those "daemons" (or is it "demons"?) Have been
mucking about the bottom of the bog lately, stirring up trouble, and making
me blue too often lately. I don't think it's NT, but likely a third party
program that's to blame. Don't know which, though, and that's the
frustrating part. Snort!

 MM>> That's because NT actually started out as OS/2 v3.

 SM> Waitaminute!  I thought Win95/8 started out as OS/2 v3, minus the sexy
 SM> HPFS file system.  ...Or, was Win95 descended OS/2 v2 ?  (Not only are
 SM> all these "cousin" operating systems starting to seem almost
 SM> incestuous, but it's also getting very hard to keep the various
 SM> lineages straight.

Nope. Win 9x is pure, 100% Micro$haft manure. It was excreted out of the
Windoze 3.1 Win 32S project, and is more closely related to Xerox's old GUI
operating system, developed in 1981 for it's STAR systems, than anything
else. It was this OS that Micro$haft ripped off for it's original Windows
v1.0 OS, since Xerox, as part of a business partnership, allowed
Microsoft's technicians to closely examine the inner workings of their STAR
systems.

The high foreheads in Redmond have finally realized that they can't make a
stable kernal (or even a cob, for that matter) all by themselves; so
they've fallen back to what they've always found success with: stealing
someone else's ideas.

Just as proof of it's lineage, NT v4.0 still has an OS/2 subsystem, that
provides support for running OS/2 v1.0 (16 bit) native apps, and NT still
works with *.CMD extentions for batch files, just like OS/2. Also, although
COMMAND.COM works for creating DOS boxes, CMD.EXE is the native NT command
interpreter.

 SM>>> getting wildly off-topic for a "humor" message area.  I
 SM>>> counter this by saying that my using words like
"stable" and
 SM>>> "reliable" as adjectives for any Micro$oft
Windows operating
 SM>>> system will have many meese laughing their antlers off.

 MM>> It's kinda like the idea of an "honest politician", eh?

 SM> Right you are.  The question I don't want to answer is whether that
 SM> laughter is from honest amusement or the result of hysteria resulting
 SM> from the trauma of using these "user friendly" computers.

          --------------------------
         |   Windows Error # 666    |
         |                          |
         | Your computer is a P.O.S.|
         |          ______          |
         |         |  OK  |         |
         |         `------'         |
          --------------------------

 SM> P.S.   ...That favor;  Would you please quote back the normally
 SM> hidden "SEEN-BY" lines from this message.?

Coitenly! See below...

 SM> I'm trying gather information on a possible AntlerLink break.
 SM> Also, I'm hoping a message from the western or southern herd
 SM> will provide provide a "linking message" for our strayed Ottawa
 SM> herd. ...S.M.

If you need some gronks to be sent to mail mover meese, I can "shake
the bushes" a little, being a mail mover moose myself; as can my
southern partner. 
I also have at least one Ottawa link...

 SM> -+-
 SM>  + Origin: origin void where prohibited   (1:249/127)
 SM> SEEN+BY: 10/345 106/1 2 3 1234 2000 123/140 500 789 128/187 130/803
 SM> 134/10 11
 SM> SEEN+BY: 134/33 143/2 153/757 167/133 226/600 229/1000 2000 3000
 SM> 249/116 127
 SM> SEEN+BY: 261/38 267/200 280/5003 333/0 342/3 379/1 12 1200 633/267
 SM> 774/605
 SM> SEEN+BY: 2401/504 2404/201 2624/306 3613/49 1275 3618/555 3800/1
 SM> 3830/9
 SM> {at}PATH: 249/127 116 379/1 106/1 123/500 3613/1275 134/10


--- GoldED/386 3.0.1-dam3