On 01-13-98, TOM ENRIGHT declared to ROBERT PLETT:
TE> TE>Windows 98, whenever it is released (possibly in time for the
TE> TE>millennium), is supposed to bind IE into the OS so that it *is*
TE> TE>intregal.
TE> RP> Perhaps it's Win98 I'd been hearing about then.
TE>Probably.  The only feedback I've seen on it is from Beta testors
TE>in the Win95 forum.  The current (Jan 98) issue of PC World has
TE>an interesting review of IE 4.0 using terms like "problem child"
TE>and "bug fest."  I think I'll pass on that one for awhile.
Just this evening, I heard that there is integration of IE into the
current version of Win95 that wasn't true of the version two years
older, but not as extensive as planned for Win98.
As to IE's behavior, I don't have Win95, so have only run the version
that works on Windoze 3.1 - didn't like it, but then, I didn't like
Netscape either.  Both of them, at least the Windoze 3.1 versions, seem
to spend the majority of their time running the hard drive, and both are
slow as all getout, no matter what they're doing.  At the moment, the
only Windoze browser I've kept around for rare use is Quarterdeck's
Mosaic - *considerably* faster on this slow little machine (and I mean
*considerable* - a factor of at least 5, maybe a *lot* more) and, except
for caching URLs, practically no disk accesses at all once loaded.
I suspect that even were I to have a hairy-chested monster 500mhz
machine, I'd still use my ISP's Lynx browser the majority of the time
and likely still use my DOS emailer too.  |-)
Bob     /\-/\   - proud Ilk   homebody@galstar.com
C.A.T. ( o o ) Chapter Ilks
       == ^ ==
Green Country - Oklahoma      http://www.galstar.com/~homebody/
 * SLMR 2.1a * Funny how much younger older folks are getting as I age.
---------------