🚀 go-pugleaf

mcr...@infinet.com (MacDeath) writes:



>Allen Clarke <a...@mround.bt.co.uk> wrote:

>*****SNIP****
>>Win'95 is much better than Win3.1/WFWG in all respects, its more stable,
>>more compatible and a site easier to navigate, plus it still allows you
>>to run all your old DOS apps as well.

  Look, guys, if it can provide 640k of FREE, UNUSED conventional memory,
and a good size chunk of the rest for games with NO processor slowdown
(ever try runing, say, Ultima Underworld or HiOctane or Terminal Velocity
under Windoze 3.x?) then I'm a happy camper.  If it is independant of the
640k limit that DOS imposes (for Windoze apps, at least), then I'm extatic.
Why do we all hate DOS?  It has really crappy memory management.  That's
the only reason I know of.  Half the DOS problems are bad memory management,
the other half are IRQ/DMA conflicts when you get too much cool stuff on
your system.

>well, actually i only wanna add one thing to this last bit here, from what
>i have heard of the few "beta-testers" of win95 that I know.....
>yes, it does allow you to run old dos apps, but.....yep, always the big but
>in the way.....that it allows ya to run most things WHEN and only
>when ya get the thing installed correctly....in fact most of the magazines
>are also telling of a cupl of their "beta-people" having BIG trouble on
>installation of this new os....the comments range from midly-amusing to
>try to set it up correctly to being a nightmare to even get the most
>simple things set-up right....granted these are only a handful, but when
>this new os hits the shelves......it will grow to be a bit more than a
>small handful when joe blow who knows nothing about his computer
>except how to turn it on, start win3.1 or win3.11 and pull up his
>wordperfect or whatever else applications he may use, tries to install
>an os that is a bit more stressfull to try and install......

  Yeah, I've heard of some pretty funny "technical difficulties" in 
my time.  A friend of mine told me a funny story:

  He's working in his office.  A lady across the hall calls for assistance
with her computer.  She says her Mac (I think) refuses to format or read
her disk.  She claims it used to read it just fine.
  At first he tries just telling her what to do. Stuff like
"is that little sliding tab open or closed" and "Is the computer plugged
in" and the like.  No matter what she does, the computer won't do 
anything with the disk.  Finally he goes over to her office, 
plays around with some software settings, and finally he 
takes the disk out of the drive to look at it.  She has placed the disk
label over the metal cover that needs to slide back before the disk can
be read.

  I can't imagine what could be so horrible about the Win95 install.
Unless it's a problem with upgrading from a previous version of 
Windoze, by adding to and overwriting files from the old version,
you should be able to just delete the old and install '95.
"Out with the old, Win with the new."

  Oh, and if it fixes those damned "exception errors", "protection
faults" (I STILL don't know what those are) and the like that Win 3.1
has under EVERY application that I have, I'll most certainly buy it!
Even if it doesn't take the whole system down when one app decides
to commit suicide.  If it'll work under 800x600x24bit color without
errors, I'm happy.  My HP InkJet 550C always skips lines when I print 
from 800x600, even if I switch to lower color bits.  It just sort of
runs along the document, playing "paper rock scissors" or something
deciding if it feels like printing a line of ink or not.  Very annoying
when I'm working on a school project at 12:00 a.m. and try to print.

  If it fixes all that, I'm happy.  But, then, I'd also love it if I
got a Lambroghini and a fully functional Stealth Fighter for my birthday.