Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!seismo!nbires!isis!dragheb
From: dragheb@isis.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: IBM, this is 4 u
Message-ID: <1749@isis.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 7-Apr-87 22:18:47 EST
Article-I.D.: isis.1749
Posted: Tue Apr  7 22:18:47 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Apr-87 07:26:05 EST
References: <1741@isis.UUCP> <1180@lcuxlm.UUCP>
Reply-To: dragheb@isis.UUCP (Darius "OPRDRT" Ragheb)
Distribution: world
Organization: Math/CS, University of Denver
Lines: 58

In article <1180@lcuxlm.UUCP> car@lcuxlm.UUCP writes:
>
>Since when did this news group become comp.sys.ibm.pc.flame?
>
>I had the distinct impression that this group was meant for
>the discussion of the pc and clones.  This means hardware
>options, software options, and rumors of the future.  There

Oh dear me.  I thought that I did exactly that (I guess not):
I thought I talked about

a) pc's (how poor the ibm pc is)
b) clones (Kaypro and Compaq)
c) hardware (new bus and disk drives)
d) software (operating systems and languages)
e) rumors of the future (i.e. lets see what happens with all this)

If you had included any portion of my original article, you would
have seen that I mentioned EVERY damn thing you wanted me to mention.


>are millions of PC users, many of whom do not consider themselves
>suckers.  If you are not going to contribute constructively,
>keep your comments in another group.
>

I am so sorry.  
Let me get this straight: if my opinion is different than yours
and I am fed up with rotten technology, then my comments are
not constructive? 

My whole point (which you obviously missed) is that the PC generation
could have been better if IBM had cared about the product a little more
in my opinion.
(so, i guess you are telling me that wanting computers to be more
advanced is not a constructive idea?  would you want me to be like
you? content with owning a PC that could be MUCH better? sorry, man,
I am not a sheep).

How about rereading your own article: you do not mention one of the
things that you consider essential to a comp.sys.ibm.pc article.

Anyway, back to talking about the essentials (according to 
Mr. Rath):

I heard that IBM pulled out of the Infocom conference (here in Denver).
Any ideas as to why they would do this right after announcing a new
machine?

(oh, Mr. Rath, according to your rules of posting, you may not
respond to this article unless you talk about pc's, clones, hardware,
software, rumors .... which you failed to do in your last posting).

-- 
Do it in C.  If you can't do it in C, do it in Assembly. 
If you can't  do it in Assembly, it's not worth doing!!!

Darius Ragheb    isis!dragheb  |  dragheb@isis.cs.du.edu