On 11-10-03 6:20 AM, August Abolins -> Alan Zisman wrote:
 AA>>> Win3.1: good
 AA>>> Win95: bad
 AA>>> Win98: good
 AA>>> WinME: bad
 AA>>> WinXP: good
 AA>>> Vista: bad
 AA>>> Win7: good


 AZ>> Makes a nice pattern - except it leaves out major versions (WFWG3.11,
 AZ>> NT3.1/3.5,
 AZ>> Windows 2000) AND I would probably disagree with several of the
 AA> good/bad
 AZ>> verdicts - for instance, I'm not sure by what criteria Win95 is voted
 AZ>> 'bad' other than to make the pattern seem to work.


 AA> Easily substitute 3.11 for 3.1. It's just a modest sub-upgrade. NT and
 AA> W2K were enterprise releases, and can't be included in this commercial
 AA> list.

There WAS a Windows 3.11 that was as you describe it - WFWG 3.11 however
was (despite its modest numbering) a major improvement - and for a while
was the Windows version to have, especially if you were wanting to get onto
the Internet.

It also added 32-bit disk access and other important, if under-the-hood,
performance improvements.

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thund