From: Paul Khoury (pkhoury_at_loop.com)
Date: Mon Sep 14 1998 - 05:12:32 EDT
On Sun, 13 Sep 1998 23:59:53 -0400, Bill Bryan wrote:
>After playing around with the old dos/win3.1 (16-bit) "PC card director"
>which did work under windows 95, I decided to give up. I uninstalled
>Windows 98 which by the way worked flawlessly. I'm now back to 95 with a
>noticeable speed improvement. Almost down right snappy. I needed to go
>back to Win95 to really get a feel on how slow Win 98 is on low end
>hardware like the 701C. All those months of waiting on the release of Win
>98 to obtain my power down fix for the PC cards under suspend in Win 98.
>The moral here is "newer does not always mean better". Oh well...
I thought that Win98 was supposed to be faster than 95, and then MS claims
that NT is faster than that...
Oh well.
How about this - Newer can sometimes be better, but also be slower...
This would probably apply to Warp 4 vs. Warp 3 (though with a K5-200 and 48MB of RAM
for my server, it's fast enough).
-- Paul Khoury | <pkhoury_at_loop.com> | Sent from my K5-200 http://warped.cswnet.com/~pkhoury/index.html | http://pkhoury.dyn.ml.org (local machine) Proudly running OS/2 Warp 3 & 4, Mac OS 7.5.3, Sun Solaris 2.4, Linux 2.0.29, Newton OS 1.05 ICQ#14582895
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:54:21 EST