Garmin 195 screen problem

clare @ snyder.on .ca wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:07:40 GMT, Peter Dohm
wrote:

I liked OS/2 much better!

Regards
Peter


Gee, we have a REAL masochist in our midst!!! Never heard of
ANYONE
getting that abortion installed and running properly in less than 3
hours.

All thirty floppy disks, then no application to run on it. However,
linux took three hours to install the package from cd, then over
night to compile.
--
---
Cheers,
Jonathan Lowe.
/
don't bother me with insignificiant nonsence such as spelling,
I don't care if it spelt properly
/
Sometimes I fly and sometimes I just dream about it.
:-)


John Stricker wrote:

Ed,

No, not really taking it seriously at all. In this regard, the
term YMMV is
a big, BIG, variable.

I've been selling and servicing computers for about a dozen
years now.
Almost every major stability problem with Windows since 98SE has
been when
they've added something else to it. Non-Windows compliant
software (that's
sold as compliant) and very poorly written drives have done more
to
perpetuate the idea that Windows is junk than MS could ever do
themselves.

All that said, Windows is certainly not perfect and has it's
limitations.
Now tell me the OS that doesn't. 8-)

John Stricker

"Ed Wischmeyer" wrote in message
...
Works OK for me. If I have problems most all the time they
can be
traced
back to bad third party software, drivers, or hardware.

You're not trying to take this discussion seriously, are you?
:-)

Seriously, in using "standard" Microsoft desktop applications,
I find
bugs in normal, everyday use at the rate of one every 2 - 3
hours. My
job is results, not making excuses or buying in to somebody's
marketing
BS, and Microsoft applications do not pass muster. What's my
experience?
It includes using and developing software on windowing
(operating)
systems from about a half dozen different vendors. Been there,
done
that, not buying any -- especially from Microsoft.

Time to bail out of this thread!!

Ed Wischmeyer