2 Aug
2004
2 Aug
'04
11:37 p.m.
In message <410F7874.E2F25E18(a)brothom.nl>
Bert Thomas <bert(a)brothom.nl> wrote:
"David V. Corbin" wrote:
XP = Windows 2000 with the "Teletubbies"-esque user interface
ME = Windows 98, but about 1000x less stable and with more annoying features.
If I had to use Windows, then on sub-500MHz machines, I'd use 98. On 500MHz
(or faster) machines, I'd use 2k. Personally, I prefer Linux though.
Especially when WINE behaves itself and runs my CAD software properly.
Later.
--
Phil. | Acorn Risc PC600 Mk3, SA202, 64MB, 6GB,
philpem(a)dsl.pipex.com | ViewFinder, 10BaseT Ethernet, 2-slice,
http://www.philpem.dsl.pipex.com/ | 48xCD, ARCINv6c IDE, SCSI
... Error 216: Tagline out of paper
Quite true for Windows 3.1, 3.11 95, 98. [i.e. NOT an OS]
Not true NT3.51, NT4.0, 2000, 2003. [i.e. Validly called an OS]
Debatable for XP, ME
Why debatable for XP, ME? They are based on NT as well, aren't they?