From cdippert@ix.netcom.com Thu Jun 12 10:46:12 1997 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.cso.uiuc.edu (mx1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.37]) by dynamic.isdn.uiuc.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA31691; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:46:10 -0500 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mx1.cso.uiuc.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA04410; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:46:08 -0500 (CDT) Received: from dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.5]) by mx1.cso.uiuc.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA04389; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:46:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id KAA10564; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:19:04 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:19:04 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199706121519.KAA10564@dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com> Received: from sjc-ca3-24.ix.netcom.com(207.94.249.120) by dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id sma010506; Thu Jun 12 10:18:28 1997 X-PH: V4.4a@mx1.cso.uiuc.edu From: cdippert@ix.netcom.com (Carole Dippert) Subject: Fwd: Computer Beers To: inac@engr.sgi.com To: john.weeks@quintus.com To: qkstart@ix.netcom.com To: frank@siliconvalleyone.com To: Kevin.Quinlan@isltd.insignia.com To: waldman@netcom.com To: maria.barale@isinc.insignia.com To: steve.scott@isinc.insignia.com To: ray.flowers@isinc.insignia.com To: mark.taylor@isinc.insignia.com To: jim.hatfield@isltd.insignia.com To: judith.bays@isltd.insignia.com To: keith.turnbull@isltd.insignia.com To: keith.brown@isltd.insignia.com To: cathye@extremes.csd.sgi.com To: anjali@yahoo.com To: perjos@dalnet.se To: sharon@taos.com To: leena@taos.com To: cindy@taos.com To: bwebster@taos.com To: pete.w@ix.netcom.com To: dee.perez@insignia.com To: krishna@sgi.com To: steve.margarit@insignia.com To: jon.dolkas@isinc.insignia.com To: dmichlin@airmail.net To: antonio6@airmail.net To: gcollis@taos.com To: hufe@engin.umich.edu To: chtudor@foad.org To: nancy.dapprich@sun.com To: Stephen.Ambler@isltd.insignia.com To: rollee@seagreen.csd.sgi.com To: Michael_Masnick@ccm.sc.intel.com To: roth@uiuc.edu To: tron2@ix.netcom.com To: nihilis@moral.addiction.com To: mhuft@schiffhardin.com To: reo@airaffair.com To: robb@pyramid.com To: christine@taos.com To: edc@foad.org To: bbidnick@mpcweb.com To: brad@bidnick.com To: sylviamc@relay.csd.SGI.com To: glenda@taos.com To: bruce@kline.com To: warth@uiuc.edu To: wkeil@csd.sgi.com Status: RO Content-Length: 4428 Lines: 80 >Subject: Computer Beer > >DOS Beer: Requires you to use your own can opener and requires you to >read the directions carefully before opening the can. Originally, it >only came in an 8 oz. can, but now it comes 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 alot of people >are going to keep drinking it after it's no longer available. > >Mac Beer: At first, it only came in a 16 oz. can, but now it comes in >a 32 oz. can. Considered by many to be a "light" beer. All of the cans >look identical. When you take one from the refrigerator, 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: The world's most popular beer. It comes in a 16 oz. >can that looks alot 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 3.1 Beer >at the same time. Sometimes, for apparently no reason, a can of >Windows 3.1 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: Alot of people have taste-tested it and claim that >it's wonderful. The can looks alot 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. Most people will >probably keep drinking Windows 3.1 Beer until their friends try >Windows 95 Beer and say that they like it. 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 3.1 Beer's can, but the >company promises to change the can to look just like Windows 95 Beer's >can. Touted as an "industrial strength" beer and suggested only for >use in bars. > >UNIX Beer: Comes in several different brands, and in cans ranging from >8 oz. to 64 oz. Drinkers of UNIX Beer display fierce brand loyalty, >even though they claim that all of 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. A "light" version of this beer also exists, called LINUX Beer. > >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 it 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 it is proprietary and >referred to an unknown listing in the manuals published by the FDA. >Rumors have it that this was once listed in the Physician's Desk >Reference as a tranquilizer, but no one claims to have actually seen >it. >