XPost: comp.sys.apple2, comp.sys.sinclair   
   From: samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com   
      
    wrote ...   
      
   > Sam Gillett  did eloquently scribble:   
   >   
   >>  wrote ...   
   >>>   
   >>> Ed Zagmoon wrote:   
   >>>> The Commodore 64 is much better, the Apple 2 is just   
   >>>> an oversized and expensive paperweight.   
   >>>   
   >>> You're right - the Commodore 64 is a MUCH better (more efficient), and   
   >>> cheaper paperweight.   
   >   
   >> The Sinclair Spectrum is an even better paperweight.  It is also a good   
   >> doorstop.   
   >   
   > Although nowhere near as good a doorstop as the commode64.   
   > It had the bulk and weight on its side.   
      
   Unless you had really strange doors, the Commodore 64 was too tall to wedge   
   under a door, as a proper doorstop should be wedged.  The Sinclair Rectrum   
   was a much better fit.  Besides, if you wedged it under the door upside down,   
   the rubber keyboard prevented it from slipping if a gust of wind attempted to   
   close the door.   
      
   > And if you were stretched for storage space, you could open it up and store   
   > your bread in it.   
      
   The Sinclair machines were perfect for storing used condoms, although I have   
   difficulty understanding why you Speccy girlies wanted to collect used   
   rubbers.   
   --   
   Best regards,   
      
   Sam Gillett   
      
   I saw Sir Clive making crop circles,   
   But they turned out square!!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)