On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 01:23:45 -0600, wrote:

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 09:07:51 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

Strange, considering that I found w2k more reliable than any other
version.

Maybe it is. I quit using it mainly because I still like to access
DOS.

There are a few problems with older software / hardware, but for
Windows applications 2K is much better.

Not only do I still use some dos apps., but I like to be able to
tinker with windows from the C: prompt when it gets screwed up. I
rarely have problems with 98, except for IE locking up fairly often,
which means I just use Firefox more now. The only other drawback with
98 is the need to install drivers for USB devices. I have considered
switching to WinME because of that, but I understand ME lacks dos too.


Not True. ME has DOS (v8.0) just like 98 (v7.1) does. MS has just made
some attempt to hide it, but it's there. ME won't let you boot from HD
without starting the GUI, but does let you create a bootable DOS disk.

I may have to eventually dual boot to 98 and XP or something,

XP and 2K are very similar, it's just that XP adds a lot of crap and
unfeatures.

but that
seems like a big hassle to me. All I really do with the computer is
internet, word processing and some photoshop stuff. None of this
really needs anything above 98 or more power. I cant play most of the
videos that are so popular these days on the net, but being on dialup
they are too slow anyhow, and who really needs them.....
--
46 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"Unlike biological evolution. 'intelligent design' is
not a genuine scientific theory and, therefore, has
no place in the curriculum of our nation's public
school classes." -- Ted Kennedy