[版主] 此篇由 www.cs.bgu.ac.il:80/~omri/Humor/ 取得.
REDMOND, WASHINGTON -- In an effort to dispell confusion surrounding
Microsoft's upcoming new version of Windows, Microsoft annouced today that
it would rename the upgrade -- formerly known as Windows 95 -- to WinEver.
"There seemed to be a great deal of anxiety about when the product would
ship. We felt it was in the best interest of our users to free them from
this anxiety," said a Microsoft spokesperson who requested to remain
Industry analysts were quick to praise the decision. "WinEver will free
Windows users from space and time constraints. It also gives Windows a new
timeless quality", said a member of Ziff-Davis Publishing's Editorial Staff.
"This is precisely why OS/2 is failing in the marketplace -- they have
failed to deliver a strategy for their product."
When asked when WinEver would be available, a Microsoft spokesperson said
"Whenever." The spokesperson added "It really doesn't matter since WinEver
is destined to be the most powerful and popular operating system ever."
Market and industry analysts quickly agreed adding that "WinEver has already
revolutionized the industry."
A spokesperson from IBM disagreed however. "Microsoft is still trying to
sell a product that doesn't exist. IBM has been shipping a 32-bit operating
system since 1992 that runs todays DOS, Windows and OS/2 applications in a
stable 32-bit environment with an advanced user interface. WinEver -- or
WhatEver it's called now -- still relies on DOS device drivers and is not a
true 32-bit OS unlike OS/2." He added that "users who think that WinEver
will have no compatibility problems will be in for a surprise."
Most users seem to remain unconvinced however. "WinEver will run everything
and it won't have any bugs or compatibility problems because it's from
Microsoft. Why should I buy OS/2 which is less than perfect when WinEver is
right around the corner?"
In a related story, IBM has reportedly been working on incorporating WinEver
compatibility into a future version of OS/2. Microsoft was quick to express
fear, uncertainty and doubt in regards to IBM's chances of success. "IBM is
chasing a moving target and without the source code". Industry analysis and
the media agreed adding that this is yet another example of "OS/2's failing