On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:13:36 -0400, 98 Guy wrote:

who where was a boob because he full-quoted:

As I understood it, Win2000 was supposed to be a combined version,
able to work on standalone computers (i.e. upgrade from Win98SE)
*and* networked computers (i.e. upgrade from NT versions)

Noooo. There was no "supposed to" about it. In terms of *purpose*
Win2000 was an attempt to introduce the NT paranoid-security flavour
of O/S to the masses and wean them off the (in MS' thinking) less
secure Win4 stream. Epic fail.

No, you are an epic fail.

Windoze 2k was never intended to be used as the next OS by win-9x/me
users.

Ya reckon? I guess you are entitled to think that.

In other words, win-2k was not "introduced to the masses" to wean them
off 9x/me. The "masses" never got their hands on 2k. Only developers,
system admins and other institutional / corporate power-users got their
hands on 2k (and 2k-server versions).

See above.

Windoze 2K was a progression between NT4 and XP, but it wasn't ready to
be used by the average boob, either on home computers or SOHO
computers.

I see that the other way around - those users weren't ready for 2K.

NT4 needed desperately to be updated and win-2k was the
update, but for institutional / corporate use as part of a managed
network.

Agree NT4 needed updating.

WinME was an attempt to tart up Win98 to get people to move on.

WinME was Micro$haft's way to cash in on the craze to update computers
that was happening because of Y2K (the global fear that computer
infrastructure would crash on newyears day, 2000).

I spent two years in a *very* large organisation working on
pre-emptive Y2K testing/modification. You and most others would not
believe the number of failures that were prevented by that program.
The very success of that is what leads many to describe Y2K as a
non-event.

Another epic fail - if you did a count of destops running 98SE vs
ME right now the ratio would embarrass Mickeysoft.

There was a very short time-frame between ME and XP, and that is the
real reason why you didn't see many ME systems.

From what I have seen, a *lot* of ME users reverted to 98SE within a
short timespan. Whether that was due to the (now customary) MS lack
of driver support/availability in the short term I don't know.

The networking aspect you mention is a complete red herring.
Networking has been quite functional through Win3 (as in 3.11
/WfWg) and all of Win4.

At least you got that correct. Dan-47 is completely wrong in saying
that Win-9x/me works better as a standalone computer vs when it's
connected to a network (or connected to the internet) and he's
completely wrong in saying that win-2K somehow suffers (in what way?)
when it's NOT connected to a network.

Any computer can *do more* when it's part of a network or when it has
access to the internet, regardless if it's running 9x/me or 2k or XP.

or even W3.11/WfWg ....