Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!midway!msuinfo!frith.egr.msu.edu!griffin From: griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Why are Amigaoids hell bent on proving the Amiga is better ? Message-ID: <1991Jun30.202534.12388@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> Date: 30 Jun 91 20:25:34 GMT References: <3104@kirk.nmg.bu.oz.au> <1991Jun27.170049.21231@grebyn.com> <14317@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> Sender: news@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 19 navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) writes: >In article <1991Jun27.170049.21231@grebyn.com> ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) writes: >> If your business computer crashes, you may lose untold $$ worth >>of data. >So, you're saying that IBMs are better business machines because they have >parity RAM? You either have a system with FULL parity checking, or your >feeble attempts at covering your rear are likely to fail. We use mostly IBMs at work (~250 of 'em) and they crash and hang, too. Any one of those has lost more data than I ever have on my Amiga, and then only because my wife accidently formatted 65MB of hard drive (and then I was able to recover 99% of it using DiskSalv - thanks Dave!). -- Dan Griffin griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu