Here comes another one ... :-)
If Operating Systems Were Beers...
DOS Beer:
Requires you to use your own can opener, and requires you to read the
directions carefully before opening the can. Originally only came in
an 8-oz. can, but later also in a 16-oz. can. However, the can is
divided into 8 compartments of 2 oz. each, which have to be accessed
separately. Soon to be discontinued, although a lot of people are
going to keep drinking it after it's no longer available.
Mac Beer:
At first, came only a 16-oz. can, but later also in a 32-oz. can.
Considered by many to be a "light" beer. All the cans look identical.
When you take one from the fridge, it opens itself. The ingredients
list is not on the can. If you call to ask about the ingredients, you
are told that "you don't need to know." A notice on the side reminds
you to drag your empties to the trashcan.
Windows 3.1 Beer:
One of the world's most popular. Comes in a 16-oz. can that looks a lot like
Mac Beer's. Requires that you already own a DOS Beer. Claims that it
allows you to drink several DOS Beers simultaneously, but in reality
you can only drink a few of them, very slowly, especially slowly if
you are drinking the Windows Beer at the same time. Sometimes, for
apparently no reason, a can of Windows Beer will explode when you
open it.
OS/2 Beer:
Comes in a 32-oz can. Does allow you to drink several DOS Beers
simultaneously. Allows you to drink Windows 3.1 Beer simultaneously
too, but somewhat slower. Advertises that its cans won't explode when
you open them, even if you shake them up. You never really see
anyone drinking OS/2 Beer, but the manufacturer (International Beer
Manufacturing) claims that 9 million six-packs have been sold.
Windows 95 Beer:
The can looks a lot like Mac Beer's can, but
tastes more like Windows 3.1 Beer. It comes in 32-oz. cans, but when
you look inside, the cans only have 16 oz. of beer in them.
The ingredients list, when you look at the small print, has some of the same
ingredients that come in DOS beer, even though the manufacturer
claims that this is an entirely new brew.
Windows NT Beer:
Comes in 32-oz. cans, but you can only buy it by the truckload. This
causes most people to have to go out and buy bigger refrigerators.
The can looks just like Windows 95.
Touted as an "industrial strength" beer, and suggested only for use in bars.
Unix Beer:
Comes in several different brands, in cans ranging from 8 oz. to 64
oz. Drinkers of Unix Beer display fierce brand loyalty, even though
they claim that all the different brands taste almost identical.
Sometimes the pop-tops break off when you try to open them, so you
have to have your own can opener around for those occasions, in
which case you either need a complete set of instructions, or a friend who
has been drinking Unix Beer for several years.
AmigaDOS Beer:
The company has gone out of business, but their recipe has been
picked up by some weird German company, so now this beer will be an
import. This beer never really sold very well because the original
manufacturer didn't understand marketing. Like Unix Beer, AmigaDOS
Beer fans are an extremely loyal and loud group. It originally came
in a 16-oz. can, but now comes in 32-oz. cans too. When this can was
originally introduced, it appeared flashy and colorful, but the
design hasn't changed much over the years, so it appears dated now.
Critics of this beer claim that it is only meant for watching TV
anyway.
VMS Beer:
Requires minimal user interaction, except for popping the top and
sipping. However cans have been known on occasion to explode, or
contain extremely un-beer-like contents. Best drunk in high pressure
development environments. When you call the manufacturer for the
list of ingredients, you're told that is proprietary and referred to
an unknown listing in the manuals published by the FDA. Rumors are
that this was once listed in the Physicians' Desk Reference as a
tranquilizer, but no one can claim to have actually seen it.
The biggest problem is before you can drink any one of them you
have to buy a really expensive bag of chips to go with it.
Joachim Rabe
> ----------
> From: RodsINTOMG[SMTP:RodsINTOMG@aol.com]
> Reply To: RodsINTOMG
> Sent: Mittwoch, 15. April 1998 04:10
> To: rfeibusch@loop.com
> Cc: TATERRY@aol.com; martyray@leland.stanford.edu; lawrie@britcars.com;
> vintage-race@Autox.Team.Net
> Subject: Humor
>
> At a recent computer expo (comdex) , Bill gates reportedly compared the
> computer industry with the auto industry and stated "If GM had kept up
> with
> technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving
> twenty-five
> dollar cars that got 1000 mi/gal."
>
> Recently General Motors addressed this comment by releasing the statement
> "Yes, but would you want your car to crash twice a day?"
>
> 1. Every time they repainted the lines on the road you would have to buy
> a
> new car.
>
> 2. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason, and you
> would just accept this, restart and drive on.
>
> 3. Occasionally, executing a maneuver would cause your car to stop and
> fail
> and you would have to re-install the engine.
>
> 4. You could only have one person in the car at a time, unless you bought
> "Car95" or "CarNT". But, then you would have to buy more seats.
>
> 5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable,
> five
> times as fast, twice as easy to drive, but would only run on five percent
> of
> the roads.
>
> 6. The Macintosh car owners would get expensive Microsoft upgrades to
> their
> cars, which would make their cars run mucn slower.
>
> 7. The oil, gas and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a
> single
> "general car default" warning light.
>
> 8. New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt.
>
> 9. The airbag system would say "are you sure?" before going off.
>
> 10. If you were involved in a crash, you would have no idea what
> happened.
>
> Rod Schweiger
>
|