1237e12a60d0
tech



Hello Wayne - 

CA>>> I am the only person I know that doesn't like using XP.
CA>>> Not saying there aren't any others but I don't meet them
CA>>> here in Michigan. ;-) 

WC>> My landlady had it on a not too dated machine with DSL no
WC>> less. It was so slow I walked away from it. Bleck. My 486
WC>> on dialup was faster loading a web page! 

CA>> My W31 '486 was close to XP speed here. :-) 

WC>> Landlady now has the latest and greatest H.P. so of course
WC>> it works well now. 

CA>> I've mentioned this to people who claim XP is the best
CA>> version of Windows. I tell them to try installing XP onto
CA>> a 450mhz machine and see if they like it then. LOL 

WC> Computer consultant I know refuses to recommend it for
WC> anything less than a 1.4 GHz machine! 

My W2k boots up with 20 processes executing (less than a
standard install of W2k btw) and XP boots up with 80-90
processes executing! This is before you even load an
application or touch the keyboard in any way. 

Linux does this too btw. :-\ 

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>       __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__
 

--- * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/