And please, don't tell me it's faster and whatever.. I do not notice ANY
difference whatsoever between 95 and 98.
Greg
> kra...@my.email.address (krakan) wrote:
>Well, I guess thats up to ms's marketing department to sort out.
>Also , you cannot install in less then 16 mb of ram, killing most of
>the existing older systems off...
>Personally I would be tempted to wait and grab NT5 when out as 98
>seems to be a nice stopgap in between probably going to pay most of
>the development for NT5. Wouldnt surprise me anyway.
>Still, 98 is more stable then 95, and faster.
>But your system has to be aple to produce that.
>Ie more ram, faster processors.
>If you cannot, and thats maybe 80% of the market, either upgrade the
>hardware or stay with 95.. Not much choice I suspect!
1. Win 89 has nice icons, that should be enough!
2. You get that single click capability (I disabled it)
3. You get that cool Web stuff on your desktop (I disabled it)
4. MIE with channels (I disabled it and use Netscape 4.04)
5. You can set up commercials on your desktop with the channel guide (I
disabled it)
6. Microsoft update keeps all your drivers current (this is ok), but I
don't like the idea of MS looking through my HD.
7. They added in all those little extras you had to get elsewhere like
that view desktop button. I love that button!
8. Since it takes up more space you can get that new hard drive you've
been eyeing.
9. ALOT of new hardware has been made since 95 and Win 89 will have the
new drivers for all those new pnp devices. USB too!
and now for #10....
10. WHO THE HELL PAYS FOR SOFTWARE ANYWAY?
______________
Lot...@aol.com