Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jcholewa who wrote (38846)	5/10/2001 10:01:25 AM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 275872

"I have no love for NT4. " The upside for NT4.0 was that it had greater driver support than NT3.51. In addition, it had a user interface that was more like Win95, which some people seemed to like. The downside, is that the reliability is more like Win95 also, and why do you have to restart when you change the serial port settings? I firmly believe that NT4.0 will be credited for killing Microsoft's chances in the server market. Sure, Win2k was a Whole Lot Better, but by the time it shipped, Linux could be installed by non-geeks...

To: jcholewa who wrote (38846)	5/10/2001 10:35:27 AM
From: that_crazy_doug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

<< Oh, please do! I have no love for NT4. NT5 is the first Microsoft OS since like 1992 that earned my recommendation as a competent OS for consumers. >> Hehe, I'm curious what you considered a competent OS for consumers in the years between 92 and now was? I have to admit, I liked windows 95. It was kind of buggy, but it was a lot better then windows 3.1, and it got rid of that horribly annoying extended memory challenge. It was the last windows upgrade that was really worth using. 98 and ME have a couple features I like, but I think you could get all of them from free updates.