Originally posted by Virtualbody1234+20 October 2003 - 18:52--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Virtualbody1234 @ 20 October 2003 - 18:52)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Nightwolf@20 October 2003 - 18:12
I loved 95! It was the best OS I ever had - fast, clean, and stable. I started having problems when I upgraded to 98. Now I have XP and I'll admit it's more stable than 98, but it has a lot of other weird problems and useless built-in crap. How I wish I could go back to the good old days...
Stable and Windows 95 ???? Those 2 words just don't go together.[/b][/quote]
It may not have been perfect, but it was a hell of a lot better than 3.1 and, in my experience, better than 98 as well. I can't compare it to ME or 2000 because I never tried them, but I heard a lot of complaints. And like I said, XP my not crash as often, but it has plenty of other little annoyances, such as windows that refuse to remember their size or view settings. Or how about dozens of unnecessary background processes that load automatically at startup, some of which are basically spyware. Or a version of Media Player that you cannot uninstall. All I'm saying is that 95 was much simpler and, in my opinion, better than any other OS (with the possible exception of DOS 6.22 ). Your experience may have been different.
Bookmarks