From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0052_01C2CDCB.E5915F80
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   The original retail box did not.  The original OEM version did so if =
you had purchased a new computer from an OEM with Windows 95 = preinstalled
you would have had IE 1.0.  Not that it makes much = difference.  Among
those without an agenda, which excludes Mike Miller, = IE usage started to
take off at the same time users perceived that IE = was better than the
alternatives.

Rich

  "Robert G Lewis"  wrote in message =
news:3e42a2f9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  Rich

  IE is a good browser. I think it was either ver 3 or 4 when it caught =
up with and then passed Netscape. However the original version of = Windows
95 did not include IE as part of it. I still have the Windows 95 = and
separate IE cd's here somewhere. I think they added it to windows 95 =
rather quickly though.

  Bob Lewis
    "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e41b44e{at}w3.nls.net...
       Is reality too difficult for you, Mike, to accept that you must =
lie to feel good about yourself?

       Microsoft has stated on several occasions that Internet Explorer =
usage did not take off until IE improved.  There are plenty of reviews =
that show that this started with IE 3.0 and stengthened with IE 4.0.  =
This coincides with when IE usage started to take off.  It does not =
coincided with IE 1.0 and Windows 95 where IE was introduced as an =
operating system component.

    Rich

      "Mike '/m'"  wrote in message =
news:ola34v8dkjgfhh4duv4kpm4vbce2eb2sgv{at}4ax.com...
      On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 00:16:44 -0000, "Adam Flinton" =

      wrote:

      Microsoft admitted that IE could not stand on its own merit, that =
it had to
      be bundled with Windows to become an ongoing product.

       /m

------=_NextPart_000_0052_01C2CDCB.E5915F80
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   The
original retail box =
did not. =20
The original OEM version did so if you had purchased a new computer from = an OEM=20
with Windows 95 preinstalled you would have had IE 1.0.  Not that
= it makes=20
much difference.  Among those without an agenda, which excludes = Mike=20
Miller, IE usage started to take off at the same time users perceived = that IE=20
was better than the alternatives.
 
Rich
 

  "Robert G Lewis" <r.g.lewis{at}verizon.net>">mailto:r.g.lewis{at}verizon.net">r.g.lewis{at}verizon.net>
=
wrote in=20
  message news:3e42a2f9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  Rich
   
  IE is a good browser. I think it was =
either ver 3=20
  or 4 when it caught up with and then passed Netscape. However the =
original=20
  version of Windows 95 did not include IE as part of it. I still have =
the=20
  Windows 95 and separate IE cd's here somewhere. I think they added it =
to=20
  windows 95 rather quickly though.
   
  Bob Lewis
  

    "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:3e41b44e{at}w3.nls.net...
       Is
reality too =
difficult for you,=20
    Mike, to accept that you must lie to feel good about=20
    yourself?
     
      
Microsoft has stated =
on several=20
    occasions that Internet Explorer usage did not take off until IE=20
    improved.  There are plenty of reviews that show that this =
started with=20
    IE 3.0 and stengthened with IE 4.0.  This coincides with when =
IE usage=20
    started to take off.  It does not coincided with IE 1.0 and =
Windows 95=20
    where IE was introduced as an operating system =
component.
     
    Rich
     
    
      "Mike '/m'" <mike{at}barkto.com>">mailto:mike{at}barkto.com">mike{at}barkto.com>
wrote in =
message news:ola34v8dkjg=
fhh4duv4kpm4vbce2eb2sgv{at}4ax.com...On=20
      Thu, 6 Feb 2003 00:16:44 -0000, "Adam Flinton" <adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>=">mailto:adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com">adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>=
wrote:Microsoft=20
      admitted that IE could not stand on its own merit, that it had =
tobe=20
      bundled with Windows to become an ongoing=20
    =
product. /m

------=_NextPart_000_0052_01C2CDCB.E5915F80--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4