# Who still uses Windows 95?



## Shane

People may say this thread is pointless but i would like to know...

Is there still anyone in the forum here who still uses Windows 95?

Maybe on one of your older machines?

Just courius 

Just answer a simple yes or no if you like.


----------



## diduknowthat

Nope, I had it on a P1 machine until i disassembed it for fun.


----------



## Arm_Pit

No, but I have a PC running Windows 3.1 and Windows ME, and 2000.


----------



## Motoxrdude

Nope!


----------



## spike27z

a long time ago


----------



## kobaj

Wow, is it sad that I have an old computer in my closet that still runs, and boots up windows 95 fine? My sisters computer used to be windows 95 also, but then she upgraded to 98SE.


----------



## sup2jzgte

Nope not for a very long time


----------



## Shady

i remember when i was a kid i liked the windows 95 start music
when windows 98 came out i used to replace the start music with the old one from 95.
that's the only thing i remember 
i used to only play games like DOOM, WOLF3d, Prince 2(amazing game) , and a game called "bodyblows" if i got the spelling right. i really want to have this game again but i never found . it brings back memories


----------



## OvenMaster

I have it on my backup machine that still gets used at least once a year when this one is down for maintenance or repair. 
Tom


----------



## dragon2309

Yup, I have my print server on Windows 95 cos the laser printer that i got for free only works with 95.


----------



## bigsaucybob

The last time I ever saw Win95 was when I had my PII and AOL was the greatest thing around.


----------



## unknow user

I still run Windows 95 plus! on my 486, but mostly I just use MS-DOS 6.22 or Windows 3.11 for older programs and other stuff. I just use Windows 95 for transferring files through the network (would like to use DOS for that).

To tell you the truth, I like using my 486 over my main computer...


----------



## patrickv

*re*

Never used one.Never seen it.DOnt think i was born anyway


----------



## Arm_Pit

shadyi said:
			
		

> i remember when i was a kid i liked the windows 95 start music
> when windows 98 came out i used to replace the start music with the old one from 95.
> that's the only thing i remember
> i used to only play games like DOOM, WOLF3d, Prince 2(amazing game) , and a game called "bodyblows" if i got the spelling right. i really want to have this game again but i never found . it brings back memories


Ahh, the joys of Doom and wolf3D I still have them


----------



## jbennet

3.11, 3.51 and NT4 still going strong here. 3.11 even has IE5!


----------



## jp198780

i stopped using 95 last summer. the computers all torn apart on my porch, the oldest Windows i got now is 2000.


----------



## BigBrains57

shadyi said:
			
		

> i remember when i was a kid i liked the windows 95 start music
> when windows 98 came out i used to replace the start music with the old one from 95.
> that's the only thing i remember
> i used to only play games like DOOM, WOLF3d, Prince 2(amazing game) , and a game called "bodyblows" if i got the spelling right. i really want to have this game again but i never found . it brings back memories



Yeah i remember somethin like bodyblows on my old system too, that game was fun....i only played that and DOOM/Duke Nukem on it


----------



## Mattu

Ahh the days of no product activation. You could put one copy of Windows 9x on how many ever computers you wanted to.


----------



## PC eye

I had 3.11 running on a Socket A board recently replaced along with 95 and a Linux distro. But favoring 98 and XP saw those replaced. Currently I've had the original 8bit Duke Nukem running through a DosBox virtual dos window and even saw Duke3D run with sound briefly. Unfortunately a newer Socket 939 board will probably not see 95 even tried at this time due to using the primary partition on a second drive for backing up data as well as trying another Linux distro or even Vista there.


----------



## Ku-sama

i use its for Sim Tower and crap, just some older games


----------



## jp198780

Mattu said:
			
		

> Ahh the days of no product activation. You could put one copy of Windows 9x on how many ever computers you wanted to.



can you do the same with 98/2000?


----------



## Arm_Pit

jp198780 said:
			
		

> can you do the same with 98/2000?


Not legally....


----------



## bball4life

hmm maybe soon, might be able to pick up my grandpas old old computer that runs 95


----------



## Edgesilhouette

I have a working machine with 95. Its my tester computer for programs alot of times.


----------



## Mattu

jp198780 said:
			
		

> can you do the same with 98/2000?



You can with 98 (not legally) but I think you have to activate 2000.


----------



## jp198780

i used the same copy of 2000 on different computers, with the same product key.


----------



## JFHuff

i used to have windows 98 for a long time....it was hard letting that one go. plus going to xp was weird. Compleatly new graphics setup


----------



## Mattu

jp198780 said:
			
		

> i used the same copy of 2000 on different computers, with the same product key.


Ohhh I telling Microsoft on you!...............just kidding


----------



## Geoff

jp198780 said:
			
		

> i used the same copy of 2000 on different computers, with the same product key.


You're not allowed to, but you were able to install the same version of Windows on as many computers as you want up until Windows XP SP2.  Any version that has Windows XP SP2 or newer has to be activated, and can only be used on one PC.


----------



## jp198780

yeahh, i know.


----------



## apj101

> You're not allowed to, but you were able to install the same version of Windows on as many computers as you want up until Windows XP SP2. Any version that has Windows XP SP2 or newer has to be activated, and can only be used on one PC.


yeah and we all know that the activation was an effect way to stop all that


----------



## SC7

I have an install of Windows 95 running in VMware.  IIRC, there was a guy on some forum I saw who ran only Windows 95 on his Athlon64 system somehow.  He had like modded drivers and everything.


----------



## Shane

This may seem a stupid question but can you still actualy buy Windows 95 anyware? (Not that i would want to  )

Maybe microsoft should give it away now


----------



## jp198780

lol, Ebay has alot of copys on there.


----------



## SC7

AMD said:
			
		

> This may seem a stupid question but can you still actualy buy Windows 95 anyware? (Not that i would want to  )
> 
> Maybe microsoft should give it away now


Pricegrabber has it.  My local bestbuy still has Windows Me copies on the shelf.


----------



## PC eye

I wonder if you could find copies of Windows 2.1 on EBay? I'm not surprised to hear someone developed generic drivers to run 95 on newer boards when you can still run 8bit apps with a virtual drive on an XP system.


----------



## SC7

Why 2.1, why not get the graphical MS-DOS executable known as Microsoft Windows 1.0.


----------



## PC eye

I would probably grab that as well if I had an 8086 or 8088 onhand.


----------



## SC7

Id boot it, if VMware would let me set the ram low enough and disable the functions on my P4 that prevent 3.1 from booting.


----------



## PC eye

To even run 95 you would have to install it on a small parition unless having a bios bypass utility due to the 2gb or so limitations. 98 was the one that had more problems with the 512mb limit on physical memory. That requires an edit and new entry be placed in the autoexec.bat file there.


----------



## SC7

Unless you can get your hands on a copy of 95 OSR2, which supports FAT32.  I got my hands on an unmodified IBM installer of that, and it works well in VMware.


----------



## jp198780

SC7 said:
			
		

> Pricegrabber has it.  My local bestbuy still has Windows Me copies on the shelf.



are you kidding me?  lol.


----------



## PC eye

On the Socket A board that just crapped I had 3.1, 95, 98, XP, and a Linux idstro run when there was a second drive available before loaning that out. The main thing lacking there was drivers/software for the board. I ran 3.1 briefly on a 2gb partition created there with dos 6.0. 95 was placed at first on an extended 2gb partition. When a dual boot with 98 and Linux was then tried that saw a new 50gb primary eventually replaced by.... XP. So that was to become full circle again until the drive was loaned out.


----------



## timothyb89

I just disassembled my old Win. 95 machine 
I pulled out the hdd and the RAm (the RAM isn't much use, but the 3 GB hdd might have one)
The rest of it is sitting about 8 feet away from me right now...


----------



## PC eye

That 8gb may find problems easy enough being used on a new board if that is an ATA100 model. While a new drive is backward compatible to an older ATA 33, 66, or 100 board an old drive mostl ikely will fail on an ATA133 model.


----------



## SC7

Not to mention ATA will be gone for support soon.  Most only support enough for your (I presume most have this) 2 disc drives.


----------



## PC eye

I don't think you will ATA disappear quite that fast. But there are currently boards that no longer have the eide controllers and run strictly SATA drives. The idea there however is to eliminate the ide override of the SATA controllers by default. You may even see 9,200 rpm ide drives before ATA is ever gone for good. That would be the next 2,000 rpm increment there.


----------



## wicked859

I voted no, but when I was in the attic today I found a very very old computer.........didnt feel like opening up the case but it booted 95


----------



## PC eye

Apparently you found some hidden treasure there is the system still booted after how long of just sitting around? Often the older OSs fragmented a little faster where you sometimes had to reinstall Windows to get it to run depending on the level. Under 15% would easily allow you to keep it going.


----------



## Chris Chan

Heh, last time i used 95 was this winter. Had an old p133 sitting around, got it free from school.


----------



## PC eye

Due to the age and completely outdated version of Windows on it they usually will offer old systems to students. You got it free courtesy of the tax payers. There shouldn't any complaint there.


----------



## Slackr89

started with 95 for about 2months, upgraded to 98 for a couple years, and switched to good ole' XP Pro, which now runs on the old and new computer


----------



## JamesBart

*Nope!*

had it for a while then a laptop with ME and now XP! new to the computer game!


----------



## Starman*

I still have a pc with W95 but can trump that by an order of magnitude.  I still have my 386 with Win3x plugged in.

Starman*


----------



## PC eye

Starman* said:
			
		

> I still have a pc with W95 but can trump that by an order of magnitude.  I still have my 386 with Win3x plugged in.
> 
> Starman*



 So you still have the old boat running there. The first time I saw 3.1 was on a 286 with 95 on a 386 later.


----------



## m0nk3ys1ms

8 months ago I was still using 95.


----------



## jp198780

monkeysims said:
			
		

> 8 months ago I was still using 95.



are you serious?! lol, 4 internet and stuff?


----------



## SC7

jp198780 said:
			
		

> are you serious?! lol, 4 internet and stuff?


95 works fine with broadband.  The TCP/IP protocol was available at install time in 95.


----------



## PC eye

jp198780 said:
			
		

> are you serious?! lol, 4 internet and stuff?



 98 was always easier to setup your connection on then 95 to no surprise. Since 98 was supported on the old one setup was to have XP on the primary with 98 and Linux on the second drive. 98 was put on due to 95 also not having the patch for dsl. 98 or newer is required there.   So that said goodbye to the 3.1/95/Linux setup real fast. Fortunately I can run some of the old dos stuff through a virtual dos shell.


----------



## SFR

The only reason I have Windows 95 on an old Cybermax PC is because of my Microsoft Navy Fighter game that only works with DOS 6.22.... what a great game!


----------



## PC eye

If you have a small hard drive lying around somewhere you could add that to a newer case and see a small dos partition on it. Or you could try DosBox for running older dos games and other 8bit or 16bit dos apps on a virtual dos drive. Here's a link of links with Sourceforge.net as the leader of the pack for download. http://infospace.abcnews.com/_1_2OMTTG90347TPFZ__info.abcnws.toolbar/search/web/dosbox The definition can be looked over at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOSBox


----------



## SFR

PC eye said:
			
		

> If you have a small hard drive lying around somewhere you could add that to a newer case and see a small dos partition on it. Or you could try DosBox for running older dos games and other 8bit or 16bit dos apps on a virtual dos drive. Here's a link of links with Sourceforge.net as the leader of the pack for download. http://infospace.abcnews.com/_1_2OMTTG90347TPFZ__info.abcnws.toolbar/search/web/dosbox The definition can be looked over at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOSBox


 
I forgot the type of hard drive, but it does not work with newer motherboards...  Besides, that would make the Cybermax computer absolutely worthless and I am not ready to throw away my first PC...


----------



## Bobo

Yep, I have it on an old Compaq 486 (AMD AM486 processor) and I occasionally use it, generally for reading 5.25" floppies


----------



## PC eye

SFR said:
			
		

> I forgot the type of hard drive, but it does not work with newer motherboards...  Besides, that would make the Cybermax computer absolutely worthless and I am not ready to throw away my first PC...



 You wouldn't have to throw it away. But you could gve DosBox a try to see the same game run on an XP system! The process is easy there to create a virtual C in order to mount that in a simulated dos shell. The original Duke Nukem that could never run in even 3.1 let alone 95 runs on an XP machine. And that is an old 8bit game there. You can't imagine the expression when the 1st duke was heard in surround sound and not the pc speaker!


----------



## jbennet

3.11 rocks!

10mb RAM and a 50mhz 486DX makes a monster of a machine for it.
I have IE5, windows networking and win32s installed and can play cds in it and do games it even has office (4?)


----------



## Shane

Lol i didnt think this post would gain so many replies,And im suprised to the amount of people who still has it on old computers.

I found an old 6Gb hard drive from my very old 100Mhz system which died on me a few years back and that had windows 95 on it.

I had fun last week smashing it up


----------



## PC eye

Gee you had a 6gb drive that much? The old IBM 386 saw a 500mb drive as well as the AST 486 seeing a WD 1.4gb drive still in use with 95 in surprisingly a Packard Bell 166mhz machine. Jumping out that AST piece of ... the Soyo board then used saw 500mhz with 95 at first and later 98. When first trying out 98 to upgrade from 95 I had both running on one partition. 98 was custom installed to a Window98 named folder while 95 remained in the default. 98 would offer to load 95 during bootup. Well that was an early dual OS attempt there.


----------



## leSHok

my windows 95 has about 2 whole gigs
watch out!
i tried putting high speed on it a year ago thinking it would work but i was dumb and didnt realize that i would have to upgrade to get the cord in there

or atleast thats what i remember...i recently found the bootdisk though..funny


----------



## robina_80

windows 95 is so old hat even windows 98 its like 16 years man louds of things have happend since then and prob you cant get any programs to run on win9x anymore coz there so old


----------



## SC7

robina_80 said:
			
		

> windows 95 is so old hat even windows 98 its like 16 years man louds of things have happend since then and prob you cant get any programs to run on win9x anymore coz there so old


Thank you for that...  Windows 95 is only 11 years old, (you're 5 off).  Plenty of stuff runs on 98/Me.  Windows 95 lost support mainly because of a few things.  1.  No natively web based supporting file browser.  Explorer wasn't tied into IE.  2.  The GUI is not up to standards with how the rest of Windows functions.  3.  No real support for modern languages.  4.  Closely related to DOS, not so much in W98.  4.  Driver subsystem was different.   Drivers from 95/98OE were different from 98SE/Me.


----------



## PC eye

Your #4 item is a little off there. 95PLUS/98 f1st edition were much closer since the OSR2 package offered support for 32bit apps prior to release of the first 98 edition. W95 was slightly above 3.1 with the first Windows auto loader currently the boot.ini, Win.ini, and Sys.ini files. 3.1 and the early version were manually started in order to load the GUI there. The closest there obviously was the 98SE/ME with ME no longer having the shutdown to dos mode seen in the 9X versions.


----------



## SC7

Ok, but what does that have to do with the drivers subsystem, I'm confused.


----------



## PC eye

Drivers for 32bit apps and hardwares could then be loaded on a limited basis until 98 1st edition came out. What was briefly seen in 95Plus was a brief go between from 16bit to 32bit driver support. Now we are seeing 32bit to 64bit for the next several years until 128bit OSs start being thought of.


----------



## Dr Studly

just so u people know, there is a difference beetween HAVING a computer that still has windows 95 and USING a computer that still has windows 95


----------



## PC eye

Does that also apply to those who HAVE an XP system to those who use one?


----------



## SC7

The original Doom, let's not all forget.


----------



## bball4life

Haha just got a Win 95 rig today, it was one of my grandpas old comps, it has a 133 Pentium and 16MB of ram, beat that.


----------



## lethalforce

is that...Eazy-E in you avatar?


----------



## SC7

Encore4More said:
			
		

> just so u people know, there is a difference beetween HAVING a computer that still has windows 95 and USING a computer that still has windows 95


Very true indeed.


----------



## bball4life

Encore4More said:
			
		

> just so u people know, there is a difference beetween HAVING a computer that still has windows 95 and USING a computer that still has windows 95


Yep, currently I only have a windows 95 machine, but I got it last night so ya, but I just have to get a cheapo keyboard and mouse and see what to do about a monitor and will probably use it to do some random crap just for the heck of it, I will still use xp more.


----------



## PC eye

My old AST 486 had 32mb until that was increased to the 64mb max. The Intel chip there ran at 66mhz. Talk about some sssssllllooooowww hardware compared to an AMD64 3500+ processing XP with 2gb of ram these days.


----------



## jp198780

my older Win. 95 rig, had a 150mhz processor, with 32mb ram, and a ton of viruses 2 lol, would hardly work lol.


----------



## SC7

jp198780 said:
			
		

> my older Win. 95 rig, had a 150mhz processor, with 32mb ram, and a ton of viruses 2 lol, would hardly work lol.


It's becoming increasingly hard to use 9x based systems without getting viruses.  Most newer antiviruses won't run on 9x, and even fewer on 95.   Now that Microsoft has stopped supporting the two, it's even more vulnerable.  Hackers now know if they can find an exploit, they can use it and get at the still reasonably decent number of users out there that still are on 9x.


----------



## bball4life

My 95 machine is pretty clean, for that past few years its been in my grandpa's extra bedroom, still got some use but wasn't hooked up to the internet.


----------



## SC7

bball4life said:
			
		

> My 95 machine is pretty clean, for that past few years its been in my grandpa's extra bedroom, still got some use but wasn't hooked up to the internet.


Give it some time on the internet, and that will change.


----------



## Dr Studly

i HAVE a computer that has windows 95 on it... but no, i don't use it


----------



## PC eye

In the 9X days if anything went wrong on a drive such as a virus you simply wiped the drive and put Window right back on. If you had a major software problem the same would often be seen. But one correction is that 9X and 95 are simply part of the same. The 9X term applies to both 95 and 98. It is about 1 1/2years now since all support was dropped on 98SE. It certainly won't be much longer for ME especially when Vista is released. As far as hackers they can get into XP far easier then thought.


----------



## bball4life

SC7 said:
			
		

> Give it some time on the internet, and that will change.


Won't ever be hooked up to the internet for a few reasons:
1)only has a 28.8k modem in it, and I don't have dialup anymore
2)its in my room so I would have to get another wireless card to get it to connect to my router
3)Could run a landline but that would mean buying the cable and a gigabyte modem

Both options 2 and 3 probably cost more then the computer is worth.


----------



## jp198780

SC7 said:
			
		

> It's becoming increasingly hard to use 9x based systems without getting viruses.  Most newer antiviruses won't run on 9x, and even fewer on 95.   Now that Microsoft has stopped supporting the two, it's even more vulnerable.  Hackers now know if they can find an exploit, they can use it and get at the still reasonably decent number of users out there that still are on 9x.



yeahh, i tooke it apart last summer  , it's in parts on my porch, wish i kept the case though, i could've used it.


----------



## SC7

PC eye said:
			
		

> and 98. It is about 1 1/2years now since all support was dropped on 98SE.


No, it happened this july 11th, as in October 2003, they extended the deadline because 30% of google's hits were on 98 machines.


----------



## Calibretto

one of my friends uses 95 on his Pentium III I think. Piece of junk.


----------



## Ekim401

lmao, i havnt even heard that in like 7 years


----------



## SC7

Calibretto said:
			
		

> one of my friends uses 95 on his Pentium III I think. Piece of junk.


I ran Xp on a PII very nicely, no reason he shouldnt on a PIII.


----------



## bball4life

SC7 said:
			
		

> I ran Xp on a PII very nicely, no reason he shouldnt on a PIII.


Haha too bad it wouldn't work on my PI, all 133MHz of goodness.


----------



## PC eye

bball4life said:
			
		

> Haha too bad it wouldn't work on my PI, all 133MHz of goodness.


 
 You could run 98SE, ME, or 2000 if not a Linux distro on the older system there.


----------



## SC7

PC eye said:
			
		

> You could run 98SE, ME, or 2000 if not a Linux distro on the older system there.


98SE sounds like the best option there, assuming he doesn't want to go for linux.


----------



## PC eye

Where newer versions of Windows will drag on the old hardware there Linux is one item that will readily go on even older systems then that. The one thing that Linux does seem to lack however is the cpu idle process seen in Windows and MAC. So you would have to keep busy somewhat with Linux. Adding further the MS flop known as ME...    98SE always worked alright here.


----------



## jp198780

i was thinking of putting 95 on my other PII system lol, then sell it.


----------



## Shane

SC7 said:
			
		

> I ran Xp on a PII very nicely, no reason he shouldnt on a PIII.



Same here,P2 400Mhz 128Mb of ram.

It ran fine.


----------



## jp198780

i had XP on my old Gateway, PII, 350MHZ, 256MB ram.


----------



## m0nk3ys1ms

I ran XP smoothly on my old system, Celeron 333Mhz, 384MB Ram, 128MB MX4000.


----------



## Atsumi

Nope.  All four PCs in my house are running 2000.

Still kind of sad. XD


----------



## jp198780

i have 2000 on a couple pc's in my house, in the sig.


----------



## Shane

jp198780 said:
			
		

> i have 2000 on a couple pc's in my house, in the sig.



Win 2k isnt that bad,Actualy i prefer it than xp


----------



## bball4life

AMD said:
			
		

> Win 2k isnt that bad,Actualy i prefer it than xp


Ya 2k isn't that bad, how much would it be for a copy of like 98 se?


----------



## SC7

bball4life said:
			
		

> Ya 2k isn't that bad, how much would it be for a copy of like 98 se?


You can check pricegrabber on that one, should be around $30-$40 for a sealed copy.


----------



## bball4life

SC7 said:
			
		

> You can check pricegrabber on that one, should be around $30-$40 for a sealed copy.


Well there goes that idea, on price grabber its anywhere from $40 from a place I have never heard of to $140.


----------



## SC7

bball4life said:
			
		

> Well there goes that idea, on price grabber its anywhere from $40 from a place I have never heard of to $140.


Hmm, oh well.  Just for the hell of it, who today would buy this.


----------



## bball4life

SC7 said:
			
		

> Hmm, oh well.  Just for the hell of it, who today would buy this.


haha, seriously.  Well I think I am just gonna stick with windows 95, gotta go get myself a cheapo keyboard and mouse for it still and figure out a display for it.  The only thing good about it is it has some random decent games on it, like sonic  .  That is probably all the use it will get.


----------



## jp198780

bball4life said:
			
		

> Ya 2k isn't that bad, how much would it be for a copy of like 98 se?



4 real? lol, damnn, i would deffinately have XP on all my pc's, if i could....


----------



## SC7

jp198780 said:
			
		

> 4 real? lol, damnn, i would deffinately have XP on all my pc's, if i could....


IDK why, on some of them, Xp would slow it down.  2K is like Xp without the eye candy.


----------



## goosy22

i have 2 computers that run 95 still, 3 with 98se, and the one i'm on runs 2000 pro...

just curious... how many people know this?

windows 98se holds the record for being "the most pirated operating system in the world"


----------



## bball4life

SC7 said:
			
		

> IDK why, on some of them, Xp would slow it down.  2K is like Xp without the eye candy.


Really windows 2000 isn't that bad, its a lot better the ME at least.  Its just more outdated thats why it doesn't seem as good.


----------



## jp198780

i like 2000, i know XP would run slow on my Solo, i had tryed it. XP would run good on my Inspiron 5000 though. my Solo had ME on it, i reallly had 2 upgrade 2 2000 lol.


----------



## SC7

bball4life said:
			
		

> Really windows 2000 isn't that bad, its a lot better the ME at least.  Its just more outdated thats why it doesn't seem as good.



Of course, the NT kernel alone is a great improvement over Windows Me.  The main problem for home use of Windows 2000 is that it really lacks media features, and wasn't really designed as a "Media" OS, but more of a "business" OS.


----------



## PC eye

2000 Pro and XP Pro as well still need media capacity for presentations. Rather then being included in the default package the appropiate softwares are added later depending on the type of presentation like ad agency, sales dept. for a manufacturer, services industry, etc. while being initially geared for network rather then stand alone systems. Many still favor running the Pro editions of either 2000 or XP. Vista will see two versions for home namely the basic and premium editions while the other three are more business and network orientated according to the descriptions.


----------



## SC7

PC eye said:
			
		

> 2000 Pro and XP Pro as well still need media capacity for presentations. Rather then being included in the default package the appropiate softwares are added later depending on the type of presentation like ad agency, sales dept. for a manufacturer, services industry, etc. while being initially geared for network rather then stand alone systems. Many still favor running the Pro editions of either 2000 or XP. Vista will see two versions for home namely the basic and premium editions while the other three are more business and network orientated according to the descriptions.


That presentation technology is included in Vista, IIRC.


----------



## bball4life

PC eye said:
			
		

> 2000 Pro and XP Pro as well still need media capacity for presentations. Rather then being included in the default package the appropiate softwares are added later depending on the type of presentation like ad agency, sales dept. for a manufacturer, services industry, etc. while being initially geared for network rather then stand alone systems. Many still favor running the Pro editions of either 2000 or XP. Vista will see two versions for home namely the basic and premium editions while the other three are more business and network orientated according to the descriptions.


Ah, so the standard home and pro versions will technically no longer exist.  So I am guessing the deluxe version is taking over for pro for home computers and stuff, while the pro will be mainly business?


----------



## PC eye

The five versions are explained as follows: The five different editions of Windows Vista are designed to fit the way you intend to use your PC:
*Windows Vista Business*
Regardless of the size of your organization, Windows Vista Business will help you lower your PC management costs, improve your security, enhance your productivity, and help you stay better connected.
*Windows Vista Enterprise*
Windows Vista Enterprise is designed to meet the needs of large global organizations with highly complex IT infrastructures. Windows Vista Enterprise can help you lower your IT costs while providing additional layers of protection for your sensitive data.
*Windows Vista Home Premium*
Whether you choose to use your PC to write e-mail and surf the Internet, for home entertainment, or to track your household expenses, Windows Vista Home Premium delivers a more complete and satisfying computing experience.
*Windows Vista Home Basic*
Windows Vista Home Basic is designed to deliver improved reliability, security, and usability to home PC users who just want to do the basics with their PCs.
*Windows Vista Ultimate*
If you want all of the best business features, all of the best mobility features, and all of the best home entertainment features that Windows Vista has to offer, Windows Vista Ultimate is the solution for you. With Windows Vista Ultimate you don't have to compromise. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/editions/default.mspx


----------



## SC7

Very nice post.  You should probably link that in your profile.


----------



## bball4life

Yes very nice, Home premium is looking good, as long as its kind of like pro now.  We'll have to see the prices when it comes out though.


----------



## SC7

I really hope I can get my hands on Vista Ultimate.


----------



## bball4life

SC7 said:
			
		

> I really hope I can get my hands on Vista Ultimate.


That would be nice, but be ready to fork over a few hundred bucks at least even for the oem version, if not more.  You never know how high microsofts prices will be.


----------



## PC eye

bball4life said:
			
		

> That would be nice, but be ready to fork over a few hundred bucks at least even for the oem version, if not more. You never know how high microsofts prices will be.


 
 Ah gee? I only paid $200- for a cd, book, and retail box when buying 98SE. I bought MSDos 6.22 along with WIN 3.1 for far less for an IBM 386. A copy of a 95 upgrade disk was given to me later when I swapped the IBM for the AST 486 in a barter for parts. I didn't even need to have 3.1 on to install 95 from the upgrade disk just by typing setup at the dos prompt while at the cd drive. I hope Vista doesn't turn out to be another flop however like ME was.


----------



## SC7

PC eye said:
			
		

> Ah gee? I only paid $200- for a cd, book, and retail box when buying 98SE. I bought MSDos 6.22 along with WIN 3.1 for far less for an IBM 386. A copy of a 95 upgrade disk was given to me later when I swapped the IBM for the AST 486 in a barter for parts. I didn't even need to have 3.1 on to install 95 from the upgrade disk just by typing setup at the dos prompt while at the cd drive. I hope Vista doesn't turn out to be another flop however like ME was.


Hmm, I don't think vista will turn out to be a flop, as Microsoft is really pusihing this, and they won't release a far better kernel so soon afterwords.  (this has exausted their R&D for a while).  There are also a lot of things that are going to require vista, and in the end, it will do well.  However, that still large population of old machines may get left behind.  (Linux???).  As for upgrade CDs, the original Mac OS X 10.1 update CD which was free over 10.0 for current users, actually worked as a regular installer.


----------



## PC eye

The premium edition would be the one looked at here IF they ever get the IE 7.0 isues worked out that comes along with Vista. The beta version was a nightmare trying to get rid of it. That was a definite "flop" there. One main problem with that release was the "about blank" popup windows that appeared after closing out Windows Explorer windows. Right then an IE 7.0 windows would come out of nowhere. many trying that soon were forced to perform repair installs on XP systems. Back to those simple 95 days would be so much easier there.


----------



## m0nk3ys1ms

PC eye said:
			
		

> The premium edition would be the one looked at here IF they ever get the IE 7.0 isues worked out that comes along with Vista. The beta version was a nightmare trying to get rid of it. That was a definite "flop" there. One main problem with that release was the "about blank" popup windows that appeared after closing out Windows Explorer windows. Right then an IE 7.0 windows would come out of nowhere. many trying that soon were forced to perform repair installs on XP systems. Back to those simple 95 days would be so much easier there.



I had nothing but problems with the IE7 betas, very unstable for me.


----------



## PC eye

A sudden need for a drive wipe later to learn the bios was failing saw that removed. I've heard a number of complaints from people trying to get rid of it and back to IE 6.0! The betas were probably intended for tryout on the beta version of Vista and not geared for XP. They now have to work this out if they expect people to use that as a default browser. Gee? FireFox looks better all the time there!


----------



## jp198780

i would stay with IE6, what i got...


----------



## PC eye

With 95 you didn't have a default browser included. This is where MS saw a big law suit when incorporating IE in the following versions. Netscape and others then saw themselves being pushed out and filed suit. On the earlier versions upto 95 you simply had to find a browser that worked like IE 4.0 or something and stuck with that. 98 saw IE 5.0 built into it.


----------



## bball4life

jp198780 said:
			
		

> i would stay with IE6, what i got...


I would go firefox


----------



## PC eye

I run both here. When running a search with IE all you get is adbots and malwares if you hit the wrong site! The one thing missed with FireFox is the abilty to addon a toolbar of choice there. You are stuck with Google only for a search engine.


----------



## Bobo

PC eye said:
			
		

> The one thing missed with FireFox is the abilty to addon a toolbar of choice there. You are stuck with Google only for a search engine.


Since when?  I use both Yahoo and Google toolbars in Firefox.  And it uses Ask Jeeves, Dogpile, and other ones also.


----------



## bball4life

Bobo said:
			
		

> Since when?  I use both Yahoo and Google toolbars in Firefox.  And it uses Ask Jeeves, Dogpile, and other ones also.


honestly... j/k 

Firefox rules all


----------



## diroga

i have an AMD 160(OCed) 64mb ram, 420MB HDD, trident 1mb video card and win95 4.0. it all runs extreamly slowly.


----------



## SC7

PC eye said:
			
		

> I run both here. When running a search with IE all you get is adbots and malwares if you hit the wrong site! The one thing missed with FireFox is the abilty to addon a toolbar of choice there. You are stuck with Google only for a search engine.


1.  There are plenty add on tool bars.
2.  There are plenty built in, and ad on search extensions.


----------



## Redbull{wings}

my backup p3 computer quad-boots linux, xp, 95, and 98 all on 2 hard drives(i got bored one summer it took me a week to track down a couple new parts for the system....)


----------



## bball4life

Redbull{wings} said:
			
		

> my backup p3 computer quad-boots linux, xp, 95, and 98 all on 2 hard drives(i got bored one summer it took me a week to track down a couple new parts for the system....)


Why?


----------



## Redbull{wings}

because i got bored...id nvr played with linux b4 so i loaded that....i found the origanol recover disk and wanted to see if it still worked...it did, i was playing with installing windows 98 and had fun with that then i wanted to see if it could run xp and it does(i use xp mostly just for browsing internet if theres something wrong with my gaming rig)


----------



## Viking

Every once in a while I run into someone with windows 3.1.
Run into a lot using DOS.
WIN 95 not as much as a few years ago.
win 98 is starting to disappear
I had a customer ask me once, "...how long has windows 98 been out " ?


----------



## bball4life

Viking said:


> I had a customer ask me once, "...how long has windows 98 been out " ?


What a genius.


----------



## jp198780

dont they release Windows 95 etc. like a year before it turns that year? lol, or just released it in like 95?


----------



## Arm_Pit

jp198780 said:


> dont they release Windows 95 etc. like a year before it turns that year? lol, or just released it in like 95?



Windows 95 came out in year 95. In augest i belive....


----------



## Burgerbob

diroga said:


> i have an AMD 160(OCed) 64mb ram, 420MB HDD, trident 1mb video card and win95 4.0. it all runs extreamly slowly.



You have 4X the RAM that i had on my WIN95 machine... and a faster CPU (mine was a P133). Lucky.


----------



## SC7

jp198780 said:


> dont they release Windows 95 etc. like a year before it turns that year? lol, or just released it in like 95?



Not all of them.


----------



## jp198780

Burgerbob said:


> You have 4X the RAM that i had on my WIN95 machine... and a faster CPU (mine was a P133). Lucky.



in my old Artex lol, i had a 150MHZ CPU, 2.1GB HD, and 32MB RAM lol. 

SC7: yeahh, didnt 2000 come out at like the end of '99?


----------



## jimmymac

nope windows 2000 was released in february of 2000, 17th to be precise, all of the windows releases with a year after them were released in the year stated


----------



## g33 m4n

haha windows 95, thats like 10.5 years old....crap thats a long time


----------



## jimmymac

g33 m4n said:


> haha windows 95, thats like 10.5 years old....crap thats a long time




not for everyone fella, i remember selling computers at the time with windows 95 built in.....and top end systems running at a whopping 400+mhz!


----------



## tweaker

Occasionally.


----------



## PC eye

SC7 said:


> Not all of them.


 
 95 PLUS! came out sometime in '96 if I'm not mistaking. That had the 32bit support included with it.


----------



## timothyb89

It's sad to think that my Gateway 2000 with Windows 95 was around $6,000 and my new Dell with 1 GB Ram, a 160 GB hdd (the gateway's only got 3 GB), HD soundcard, and  an intel dual core 2.80 GHz processor(s) was only $650...
that's Moore's Law for you...


----------



## jp198780

yeahh, lol, good deal on your Dell, i gotta Gateway 2000 keyboard on my 240 lol, until i get a new 1...


----------



## timothyb89

The Gateway 2000 keyboards are awful- I use the old one on my laptop.
The keys make a ver annoying and loud noise when u push them...
I can say, Windows 95 was big while the was new..
Then: amazing
Now: crap


----------



## jp198780

yup, very loud, i have the original keyboard that my 110 came with, loud also lol.


----------



## PC eye

timothyb89 said:


> It's sad to think that my Gateway 2000 with Windows 95 was around $6,000 and my new Dell with 1 GB Ram, a 160 GB hdd (the gateway's only got 3 GB), HD soundcard, and an intel dual core 2.80 GHz processor(s) was only $650...
> that's Moore's Law for you...


 
 I remember looking over an HP laptop that ran right about $5,000 with 95 on it some 7yrs. ago. Now you can grab a few different brands for under $800 with XP on them and 512mb of ram over the 128mb at the time.


----------



## timothyb89

Wow...
128 MBs of RAM?
That has more memory than my Windows ME laptop... (which just has 64 MBs)
I never knew 95 supported that much RAM...


----------



## PC eye

WIN 95 can run on a 1gb system when recently tried along with WIN 3.1 as a dual boot with Linux. WIN 98 is the one with 512mb limitations. To get around that you add a new line and even a new section in the Autoexec.bat file. Under the "[ENH=386]" section you simply add the "MaxPhysPage=30,000" line in under the title there to have 98 run normally. When running a pair of Corsair xms series 512s 95 and 3.1 alike went right on.


----------

