Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 12 Jul 1998 07:27:57 -0500
From:      Michael Horton <handh@netten.net>
To:        Spidey <beaupran@JSP.UMontreal.CA>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: FAT32 Partitions
Message-ID:  <199807121230.HAA17499@cedar.netten.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980712075845.378B-100000@outpost.nada.org>
References:  <000301bdad7e$5c0ecbc0$2da626cb@nexus>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
At 07:59 AM 7/12/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Unfortunatly, FreeBSD does not currently support FAT32, but CAN mount
>FAT16 dos drives and floppies.
>
>How is Win98? Does it s**k as hard as Win95?
>
>
>Spidey


At work, we have found that Windows98 beta is more stable than Windos95
(i.e., fewer crashes).  It also has better graphics files/documents built
(almost up to the quality of the rest of the computing world).

On the downside, it is bigger and slower.  It requires a substantially more
hard drive space than Windows95.  It requires more RAM and a faster
processor to run at the same speed as 
Winows95.  We would tend to agree that this is Windows 4.1 (with Windows95
being 4.0) rather than a  Windows 5.0 product.

This testing and use in on HP Vectra VL/5series (P133->P2/233).

It is interesting to note that MS is having the same type of support
problems with Windows98 as Windows95 (i.e., lots of phone calls for support
without the proper number of phone support technicians.)

I would assume that all this means, to answer your question, "Yes,
Windows98 is as bad as Windows95!?!?!"

HTH,

MH

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199807121230.HAA17499>