RE: XP and PS Driver

[m.oritz_b.erger@xxxxxxxxxxx (Moritz Berger)]

Dov,

I've heard that notion ("stick to the old and faithful") over and over
again:
Windows 2000 is worse (slower, less stable) than NT 4
NT 4 is just a waste of hardware compared to Windows 95
Windows 95 is inferior to Windows 3.1 (takes much longer to boot, for one
thing)
Windows 3.1 is just eyecandy, better stick to DOS and a multitasking shell
DOS is just a CP/M clone
...

Do you expect that the logical time to start recommending Windows XP might
arrive when the successor has been around for a couple of years ;-) ?

Just kidding ...

Moritz

P.S.: If you just count the improvements in the 5.1 kernel (without
regarding the new security and management features), there certainly is a
not-so-small gap between Win2k and XP:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/12/XPKernel/XPKernel.asp

> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:owner-framers@omsys.com] On Behalf Of Dov Isaacs
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 12:49 AM

> downgrade -- Windows XP Pro is essentially Windows 2000 with 
> an attitude and tollbooth), 


** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **