On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 08:50:53PM +0000, Mitch wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:54:11 -0600 "Graham, Steve"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > When / Where would a person notice the best performance using
> > Win4Lin or VMWare? Is there a ebuild package for VMWare?
>
> [ snip ]
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Speed example. Win4lin windows 98 and IE 6.1
> boots faster on my machine then starting Phoenix 0.5 in linux
> directly
I think that's probably because IE is already running and/or
loads into memory when the OS boots up. Remember, MS was in
court for a while about that matter.
> > What are the benefits of using Win98 vs. Win2000? Is there
> > any real reason to use one version over the other, except
> > personal preference?
>
> vmware works with any os, but since the performance is less,
> use the lowest needed os to use your program. Why have a 1.5gb
> windows XP install on your machine when your program works on
> 95?
>
> Win4Lin only works with dosbased Windows versions like 95 and
> 98. dont know about ME
Stability. Windows 95 and 98 are the reasons MS has such a
notorious reputation in the area of stability (and win 3.x, which
was even much worse). If you install Windows 2000 and curb your
behavior to be discriminate a little what you're willing to
install, it can run for long periods of time without crashing.
Maybe not long periods in the Linux/FreeBSD/Solaris league, but
orders of magnitude greater than you'd get from a 95 or 98 box.
And someone earlier was talking about Windows 2000 using ntfs.
That's only the default. You can install 2000 to a fat32
filesystem. It might run a little slower, but it will work
better with Linux and you'd be using fat32 on a 95 or 98 system,
anyway. And finally, since both your Windows install and your
Linux OS will be running concurrently, you can network them, and
copy files back and forth using samba and smbfs.
I do agree with the stab at the 1.5gb Windows XP install, though.
I'm stuck with that at work, and I haven't been able to tell any
difference from 2000 yet, except that the licensing sucks, it's
more expensive, and there are some pretty pictures on my desktop.
And it enables the administrators to tighten down the box more
completely so that I can't do shit.
God, I hate MS! They suck and their crap is omnipresent.
- richard
--
Richard Kilgore
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
