At 02:12 AM 7/17/01 +0000, you wrote:
>My general impression is that the aging windows 95 is probably the
>best version of windows for being able to actually run most of
>your dos programs.
>
>Is this correct? If I ever need to get a copy of winblows for work
>related reasons, I would like one that let me get to a relatively
>stable form of dos relatively easily.
I've used both windows 95 and windows 98 and found both to be pretty stable
when set up with care, maintained, and not subsequently fiddled with but
merely used in a regular fashion. I do prefer 98 when I can use it, I like
the browser integration, the quicklaunch toolbar, and so forth. for DOS
box I find there is little difference although the w98 DOS is likely more
stable as they've changed how it allocates resources for 8 and 16 bit
services over the previous system. I'd detail it for you but enough bits
of the verbal information accompanying the knowledge I learned have
evaporated that I cannot describe the knowledge anymore. Sorry.
Anyway it involves virtual machines and resource allocation between
programs and there are more VMs used in the newer system.
Regarding WinME I have heard that they are pulling it off the market and
will not be supporting all those machines that shipped with
it. Furthermore it contains no legacy support. You cannot run your old
DOS apps or install older equipment with it. No 16 or 8bit support. w2k
is a monster of an application requiring a fair bit of skill to install and
use plus a hefty lot of machine to run. I think for the next few years
people will continue to use w9x if they want to use a 32 bit Microsoft product.
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
More info can be found at;
http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html
