Jump to content
Posted 26 November 2012 - 06:04 PM
Posted 26 November 2012 - 06:41 PM
Edited by Platypus, 26 November 2012 - 10:18 PM.
Megabyte, not Gigabyte...
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:13 PM
Windows 95 was fine for its time, but then so was Windows 3.11, MS-DOS 5, MS-DOS 3.3, CP/M...
I don't think there should be any trouble, you're entitled to your opinion. But I do think sometimes we view the past through rose tinted glasses.
The first release of Windows 95 (which I got immediately on release) was under developed. It was limited to FAT16 partitions (max 2GB), had no USB or AGP support, still had 16 bit code which limited stability and memory handling, and ran co-operative not pre-emptive multitasking. But it was great if you wanted a modern GUI Windows on 4GB of RAM.
By OSR2 it had become more polished, but the USB support was uncertain and having to underclock fast CPUs to apply a patch before it would run at full speed was a kludge.
Once Windows 98 had matured into SE, I had no hesitation in abandoning Windows 95 for the all-round improvement in 98SE, likewise migrating from 98 onto the all-round excellent XP. A trip into the past can be interesting, but i really don't think we could successfully have stayed there.
Edited by kcsummer, 26 November 2012 - 10:14 PM.
Posted 04 December 2012 - 03:23 AM
Posted 01 February 2015 - 11:47 AM
Posted 21 June 2015 - 04:34 PM
Everything up to and including Windows 98 was just DOS.
Windows 2000 was the best OS Microsoft ever came up with. Everything after that was just bloat and "we need an excuse to force people to pay for a new OS".
Posted 28 June 2015 - 09:56 PM
Posted 15 July 2015 - 10:39 AM
Well, its good to hear some comments for the past. Yet the world is changing by all these technologies around us. You have nothing to do but try on with what's trending.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users