If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
I'm using Windows 9
98 Guy wrote:
" used improper usenet message composition style by unnecessarily full-quoting: 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) Wrong on several counts. First, you make some sort of distinction between networked and non-networked operating systems, as if to imply that win98 was somehow not suited for networked use (that it was somehow designed for stand-alone use) - which couldn't be further from the truth. Second, you imply that win-2k was a direct replacement for win-98. That is also wrong. No, not at all, as, in the part of my post that you snipped I typed "but, after its release, Win2000 was found to not work well on standalones, so the revised standalone version became WinME." Sorry, after reading to the end of your post, I now see you didn't snip that bit at all, sorry!! Anyone running win-98 was doing so as a non-system administrator (in an organizational setting) or was running it in a home/soho setting. They would continue to run win-98 in those settings until their next computer purchase - which could have been a computer with windows ME or Windows XP. So-called power users, developers or servers would have already been running windows NT4 either in an organizational setting or soho setting, and those are the ones that would have switched over to Windows 2k. Again, as I typed, Win2000 was supposed to be the combine, but didn't work in standalone situations, so implying it did work as a networked replacement Home users that were also "power users" or early adopters didn't switch from win-9x/me to Win-2k for a variety of reasons, but predominantly because early driver support was lagging on win-2k, particularly for sound cards. Power users (in home settings) are more likely to be avid game players. Micro$oft's own sales documents specifically mention that win-2k was not designed for home use (the support load that microsoft would have experienced from home users trying to figure out how to use win-2k would have been overwhelming). And the hardware requirements in terms of CPU, ram and hard-drive size were higher for win-2k vs 9x/me, and in those days that difference equated to significantly more expensive price tag. So you might think that win-2K was somehow part of the upgrade or migration path for win-9x/me - but for all the reasons mentioned above, it wasn't. Just look at your own experiences with people you know, and how many of them went from win-98 to win-2k (in 2000 or 2001) vs win-xp (in 2002 and beyond). I stuck with Win98SE (on my desktop computer, which I still use, occasionally) until I brought this laptop which came with Win7 pre-installed. I then dual-installed various Linux installations which is where I send most of my on-line time, basically just booting Win7 to get various updates! At my last place of work, the Australian Taxation Office, they only updated to Win7 from WinXP, sometime after I left in 2011. Don't know when any previous updates had occured. Most family members have updated Windows versions as they brought new computers, so no real "updating" of OS's. but, after its release, Win2000 was found to not work well on standalones, so the revised standalone version became WinME. Again, this distinction between OS functionality or OS performance and the network "connected-ness" of the machine is bogus. O.K., as I started my previous post "As I understood it,", your understanding was different!! Daniel |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Highest Version of Adobe Reader for Windows 98se | [email protected] | General | 0 | May 8th 10 12:34 PM |
New Adobe Shockwave Player vulnerability | MEB[_17_] | General | 1 | June 25th 09 04:46 PM |
New Adobe Shockwave Player vulnerability | MEB[_17_] | General | 0 | June 24th 09 11:04 PM |
adobe shockwave | boone | General | 1 | October 19th 08 08:55 PM |
Adobe Reader Version | baumgrenze | General | 1 | January 6th 07 05:29 AM |