Re: Win 98 and misfortune
On Wed, 22 Jul 1998, Ralf Nieuwenhuijsen wrote:
> No, we should be worried with windows '00 .. in the year 2000 
> Its gonna be a whole new OS.. so I the first release at the end of 2002
> (they never finish something on time) will prolly be crap. But win98 can be
> considered a improvement compared to Win95. Dynamic registry cleaner instead
> of the stone-age-way of handeling the registery in win95, its the reason for
> about half of all performance slow-down and bugs: a messed up registry.
<offtopic><rant>
Win 20xx?! *I* don't think so; (I saw the smiley:)
In around 3 years time, Micro$oft (who I'm not overly fond of, despite
hypocritically using NT4) will ditch the '95 family in favour of NT5.
There'll be no other versions of Windows, and support will be as limited
for '95 and '98 as it is for Win3.1 now.
NT4 handles the registry (itself and through the user interfaces) like a
monkey with a spanner (i.e. exactly like '9x), and NT5 will be no great
improvement on that. They'll retain backwards compatilbility with NT4 (or
as much as possible. Just compare NT3x with NT4 and extrapolate.).
The trouble with Win32 operating systems is this:
When they work fine,
they're very very good,
And when the registry corrupts,
they're horrid.
Simply using a Win32 operating system gives a 80% chance, each time you
use it, of corrupting the registry.
I love Win32.
Not.
</rant></offtopic>
--
Carl R White - I am the soothsayer... "Sooth!"
E-mail...: cyrek- at -bigfoot.com / Remove the hyphens before
Finger...: crwhite- at -dcsun1.comp.brad.ac.uk \ mailing or fingering...
Url......: http://www.bigfoot.com/~cyrek/
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
