It seems to be a common misconception that there is actually a difference between 95 and 98 in some non superficial way. There is not. Win 98 is just the next in a line of rereleased, more patched 95's (95->95b->95 OSR2->98->98 Second Edition). All 98 is is Win 95, with all the patches applied and the IE integration by default (which is very nice, and very similar to what Netscape is planning for sometime down the track, when someone in the public decides to write it and GIVE it to Netscape (sorry)). Any bug in 98 would be in 95 if it was configured in the same fashion. The only difference is that IE5 included pretty much completely revised common controls which introduced a few install problems. This is why products such as Office 2000 require IE5. And to suggest NT has more bugs than 95 is just ridiculous (actually it does, but not per feature and not nearly as bad). You see many more reports about bugs in NT cause M$ actually care about NT's future. The only reason for 9x was to bridge the gap between 16bit DOS and 32bit NT. M$ did not want to release 98 and really don't want another version. All major development effort is focused on NT and 32bit apps with 64bit starting to be worked on. I can't see any reason to choose 98 over 95 apart from liking bugs. Also, if you want to use any of the new features of the unified WDM (Window's Driver Model) 98 is even more of a must. For instance, all USB support is aimed at 98, there are patches for 95 but these will not recieve the attention 98's code will. Hence by sticking with 95 you are simply using a less mature product and ensuring you recieve even less support from M$. More reliable, yeah right. More secure, not really. I'm not saying 98 is much better, but it ain't worse I'll tell you that. Are you still using MPLAB 3.0 as well? I'm sure you don't see nearly as many reports about bugs in MPLAB 3 as MPLAB 4, so it must be better. Sorry for the long OT I just get frustrated by the number of people out there with misconceptions such as this. Oh, and I'm not trying to have a go at those who have these misconceptions, more those who spread them (and I'm not referring to Andy here, I'm referring to the magazines and web pages). Tom. ----- Original Message ----- From: Andy Kunz To: Sent: Thursday, October 28, 1999 7:24 AM Subject: Re: [OT] WIN95 > At 05:13 PM 10/27/1999 -0400, you wrote: > >Well, if you can get it used then it'll be cheaper, but if you want a > >new copy it's the same cost as win98. Is there a reason to go with 95 > >as opposed to 98? > > Yes, it's much more reliable. Also more secure - you should see how many > messages I get from M$ about holes in their products, esp NT and 98 and > related apps (like Internet Exploder). > > Andy > > ================================================================== > Eternity is only a heartbeat away - are you ready? Ask me how! > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > andy@rc-hydros.com http://www.rc-hydros.com - Race Boats > andy@montanadesign.com http://www.montanadesign.com - Electronics > ==================================================================