29 Sep
2005
29 Sep
'05
7:43 p.m.
Rumor has it that Liam Proven may have mentioned these words:
On 29/09/05, Scott Stevens <chenmel at
earthlink.net> wrote:
Not sure why... Micro$oft is rarely compatible with itself, even on the
best of days... ;-)
... And it doesn't prompt for a CD key to
install, and it doesn't 'fingerprint' the diskettes like the 3-1/2"
diskette version.
Hmmm. I'm dubious. I'm not aware of any differing editions of Win95
in
each individual version. Original Win95 - not 95a, not OSR 2 or 2.1 or
2.5 but the plain release version - *was* very basic by today's
standards.
True.
No web browser - IE came in the Plus Pack, a
paid-for
optional extra.
Which not many people paid for... ;-)
No CD key
Bzzt. Wrong. Original Win95, at least the [very early] CD-ROM versions that
I worked with, did require a CD key... and you had to be careful to type in
the capital -OEM- by hand; most people typed it in lowercase, and it would
not pass the checksum test.
Win95A (and up) changed this to 'assume' uppercase.
I'm not saying there *weren't* Win95 versions (read: corporate) that didn't
need a CD-Key, but *every* one I ever worked with did, and I worked with a
lot of copies of Win95 very early on, from a lot of OEMs and copies
purchased straight from M$.
Yes, that job drove me to drink. Often. In copious quantities. ;-)
& I'm not aware of 95 doing anything to
fingerprint diskettes.
This I cannot speak for - I never worked with the floppy version of Win95.
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger | "Bugs of a feather flock together."
sysadmin, Iceberg Computers | Russell Nelson
zmerch at 30below.com |