home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: krel.iea.com!usenet
- From: "Daniel L. Borden" <dborden@iea.com>
- Newsgroups: alt.2600,comp.infosystems.www.browsers.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.win95.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.win95.setup,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm
- Subject: Re: I will NEVER buy Windows 95 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-(
- Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 11:09:14 -0800
- Organization: CompuTech
- Message-ID: <311F905A.749B@iea.com>
- References: <4d9iri$7n0@news.mcn.net> <4f0cgd$kd@iaehv <4feccs$e5i@ddi2.digital.net> <4fh7rd$698@pip.shsu.edu> <jsheehyDMKoM0.CqL@netcom.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.227.183.119
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0GoldB1 (WinNT; I)
-
- I tried to use Win95 for some high-end (GIS) application
- "stuff", and it gave me nothing but fits. Crashed and burned
- several times a day on both 16 and 32 bit products, and spent an
- eternity loading anything. Now I am on NT 3.51; runs great,
- very stable, and the same apps now load promptly. Some people
- in this office are using Win95 successfully with a mix of 16 and
- 32 bit apps, but they still have unreasonably long load times.
- If someone could explain to me why it takes two and three times
- as long to load the same application on the same machine when
- you use Win95 vs Win3.11 or Nt3.5x, I'd sure like to know...
-
- --
- /// Dann Borden
- <///> dborden@iea.com
-