f



Alt.OS.LINUX post of mine from year 2000 right on the money

I amaze myself.  Look at the below post from early 2000.  Except for
the tiny error in the price of Microsoft (it's closer to $30 than the
$300 I predicted), I'm pretty much right on the money for the rest of
the post.  Indeed, hardware and software go hand in hand, and faster
and faster hardware allowed Windows OS to become even better and
better.

RL

Ray Lopez
More options Feb 24 2000, 1:00 am
Technically you are right, but in fact Windows 2000, once it conquers
the
server market, will be sold to consumers.  Intel's Pentium III and
other
hardware advances will allow MSFT's alledged bloatware to run fine on
the
machines of the near future.
MSFT will go to $300.
Buy now and prosper.

Gary Hallock <ghal...@attglobal.net> wrote in message

> Ray Lopez wrote:
> > Wizard, you are stuck in the past.  Windows 95 has been superceeded by
Win98
> > which is soon to be superceeded by Windows 2000, which is stable, never
> > crashes, and soon to be compatible with all Windows software.  Buy MSFT
and
> > pro$per.
> You have all that MS stock and don't even know what products they sell???
> I've got news for you Ray  - Windows 2000 is not a replacement for Windows
98
> and MS is not marketing it as such.   The replacement for Windows 98 is
> supposed to be Windows Millennium , but that is still just vaporware.
> Gary
0
raylopez99 (937)
9/12/2008 7:23:04 PM
comp.os.linux.advocacy 124139 articles. 3 followers. Post Follow

3 Replies
505 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 13

 Except for
> the *tiny* error in the price of Microsoft (it's closer to $30 than the
> $300 I predicted), I'm pretty much right on the money...

<snip>

> MSFT will go to $300.
> Buy now and prosper.

Stock prices, adjusted for dividends and splits, 9/12/08 vs 2/24/00,
and gain (loss).  Source:  Yahoo finance:

MSFT       27.68        39.90              -31%
AAPL     149.78        28.80           +420%

Glad I didn't take your advice.
0
nessuno (2199)
9/12/2008 7:36:28 PM
On Sep 12, 12:36=A0pm, "ness...@wigner.berkeley.edu"
<ness...@wigner.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> MSFT =A0 =A0 =A0 27.68 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A039.90 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0-3=
1%
> AAPL =A0 =A0 149.78 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A028.80 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 +420%
>
> Glad I didn't take your advice.

So Ness you run a Mac?  Good for you.  I guess that qualifies as
Linux, since Mac's OS is a variant of Unix I've heard. Hope you
graduate next year--or you'll be tied for Berkeley's oldest perpetual
student (along with another couple of thousand).

RL
0
raylopez99 (937)
9/13/2008 8:18:25 AM
On Sep 12, 12:23 pm, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I amaze myself.  Look at the below post from early 2000.  Except for
> the tiny error in the price of Microsoft (it's closer to $30 than the
> $300 I predicted), I'm pretty much right on the money for the rest of
> the post.  Indeed, hardware and software go hand in hand, and faster
> and faster hardware allowed Windows OS to become

.... even more and more bloated.  Judging from reports about how slow
Vista is, it looks like the exponential bloat of Windows has
outstripped Moore's law.





0
nessuno (2199)
9/15/2008 8:49:05 PM
Reply: