[Westwales] Windows discussions in a linux forum! Sacrilege!

[mwb3 at aber.ac.uk]

Dunno... windows users hey... how can they live with themselves? ;)

On a (mildly) more serious note, most of what people have said is true:
Win 95: Definately wasn't ready to be shipped
Win 98: Little more than a bug fix on Win 98... and a buggy bug-fix at that!
Win 98 SE: A lot better... far more stable, and an all-round quite usable OS
Win 98 ME: More Microsoft money-making for bugfixes.... very few new and
useful features
Win 2000: Built on the NT core, so quite stable, but still not quite ready
for the home user market (the Hardware support wasn't up to scratch,
amongst other things...)
Win XP: Quite stable (Still not quite as good at 98 SE in my opinion, but
anyway) Quite pretty, but that prettyness means a big price in
performance. Bloated. Big time. But pretty... can't deny that!

But anyway, linux is waaaaaaaay better!!!!!!!!!

(Although saying that, KDE is still quite bloated, but hey ho - at least
it's reliable!)


> Got to admit that I've used 2K and XP for quite a long time and found them
> reasonably reliable.  Certainly if you're doing development work - 95/98
> are just too flakey.
>
> I like Linux, but I'm not scared to admit that XP's actually a reasonable
> product!
>
> John
>