As the originator of this particular thread, let me first apologize
to all for the likely perceived waste of bandwidth. Believe it or not,
it really was not (and is not) my intention to start a flame war over
some "religious" topic.

That said...

Denys writes:

>In a nutshell, Alfredo believes Windows 95 runs on top of DOS and Glenn
>wonders why I push the HP 3000 on an NT list and why I am not a Mac
>aficionado or zealot.

In fact, I believe you will not find "aficionado" or "zealot" anywhere
in my post, whether applied to the Macintosh or elsewhere.


Also, Bruce responds:

> The entire debate is irrelevant: what matters in the end is suitability
> to the purpose, not architecture or history or advertising or management
> personalities. Selecting or rejecting a platform on any basis other than
> system and vendor performance is an inexcusable breach of professional
> ethics, if someone is paying for the advice.

This is, of course, right on.


And again, I apologize both for the waste of bandwidth,
and for what may have been perceived as wanting to start a flame war.

I am always seeking to expand my knowledge and understanding. Sometimes
it is over something trivial (Do people walking in opposite directions
pass each other in the hall on the same side as if they were driving?
Is this true in England as well?) and sometimes not.
This was an attempt at the latter.

Thank you.

--Glenn Cole
  Software al dente, Inc.
  [log in to unmask]