N00BDBWI: Windows 95 actually becomes successful
- Thread starter the_lyniezian
- Start date
I had windows 95, its main lack was that it relied on a visual aspect to much. If the terrorist network Greenpeace hadn't lauched a dirty bomb, then Windows DOS would have been quickly replaced (it's dirt was that it made people blind).
DOS succeeded only b/c of the technology from the Southern Hemisphere that read wat was on the now-useless moniter.
DOS succeeded only b/c of the technology from the Southern Hemisphere that read wat was on the now-useless moniter.
the_lyniezian
Banned
Well, clearly the command line is WAY better than those stuid GUIs.
(OOC: ironically an actual opinion- must be seen to be believed:http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Head.html)
(OOC: ironically an actual opinion- must be seen to be believed:http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Head.html)
But Windows 95 WAS successful! No one uses Dos anymore!
(OOC: I'm ready for the "GAAAAHHHH!!!!!"
)
(OOC: I'm ready for the "GAAAAHHHH!!!!!"
)(OOC: It is, in case of most Linux/Unix shells if you know how to use it well. But hardly in case of DOS. The DOS Command Line plain sucks)
(IC)
That's impossible, especially after the failure of Windows 3.1. Anybody who wanted shiny graphics and simpler interfaces would just buy a Mac. Everybody else stuck with DOS. Especially after DOS 9.0 borrowed many features of unix shells and introduced its own version of lynx. Not to mention all the great DOS games that were simply incompatible with win 95.
godamit r u retarted dont you kno wat a bdwi is
(OOC: Okay, I'll admit it, I just wanted this back on the first page.)