CompuServe Messages

Greetings! On Win95 being a small step on the way to WinNT: If that's the plan, then why doesn't Microsoft SAY SO? Furthermore, won't any system that supports Win95 ALREADY support WindowsNT?? I agree with you that the vast majority of systems out there would support Win 3.x but NOT WinNT, but why not just make WinNT 'friendlier' rather than introducing yet another variant that will make half the buyers happy and the other half mad as heck? Worse, why introduce another variant that's incompatible with NT? We've got stuff that's going to run under DOS for a long time. We've got stuff that will run under NT because that's what it does. We've got no pressing need whatsoever to work with Win95, and since half of what I've read has been overwhelmingly negative, we won't even try. I came to the conclusion that Win95 was just another way for Bill Gates to grab market share when I went to pick up a pizza last Saturday night and the guy behind the counter commented on my 'DOOM' tee-shirt like this: 'Oh, yeah, great game, but it was taking too much of my time so I wiped it when I upgraded my system to Win95' <strut, strut, puff puff>. Did this gentleman have any pressing need to spend $90 on an OS upgrade? Nope. Do you think a tenth of the users out there really needed the aggravation of moving to a new OS? Not likely. How many casual users REALLY needed honest multitasking? Sorry. I figure if I were the richest man in the world my idea of what the world NEEDED would be skewed, too. Just ask 'Bob'. Disclaimer: The other half of what I've read about Win95 has been positive. Likewise, while half my casual-user friends rave about Win95, the other half either tried to return it or threw it away. I'm probably biased by the fact that we MUST use WinNT here, and by the fact that we'd probably wind up with three boot partitions even if it worked flawlessly. A godsend for the masses? More power to them. Hope the install goes well. 😉 -Eric