Error - template LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER template could not be found.

Error - template STYLE-SHEET not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the STYLE-SHEET template could not be found.

Error - template SUB-TOP-BANNER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the SUB-TOP-BANNER template could not be found.
Subject:
From:
Shyamal Gupta <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
PCSOFT - Personal Computer software discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 22 Sep 1998 22:38:15 +0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (97 lines)
Hi Lance,

At 09:11 PM 9/22/98 +0900, you wrote:
>On 22 Sep 98, at 13:00, Shyamal Gupta wrote:
>There really _isn't_ much in the way of other advantages to FAT32.  It's
>not the least bit more robust.  It's usually slightly slower than FAT16 --
>although you'd need benchmarking tools to notice it in the vast majority
>of cases.  The only other advantage, of course, is that it supports much
>larger partitions than FAT16.  But after those two advantages, there
>aren't any more that I'm aware of.

That's right. Like you, I'm also suspicious on the speed matter -- Win98
*may* be slightly slower. But without actual tests one can't be sure.

I like your "downgraded to Win98" ! Great one !!

>You'll have to clarify what you mean by "uninstall" Windows95.

I have Win95 on my laptop and Win98 on my desktop. The laptop has a tiny
500MB hard disk and is a 486DX4/75. I don't want to try out Win98 on it.
Also, FAT32 conversion which needs a minimum hdd size of 512MB is no good
for my laptop.

(I'm not a computer professional -- just a HR consultant and teacher of
Organisation Behaviour in business schools).

I install and uninstall a lot of programs. With Win95 and Win98, this means
the Registry and the Windows/System directory keep getting fatter and
fatter, and the system slower and slower over a period of time. Also,
Windows error messages appear with greater and greater frequency. Incidence
of the system hanging also increases over a period of time.

The uninstall routine of many software actually can't handle full
uninstalls effectively -- they don't clear the Registry fully, and leave
some (for instance .dll) files behind.

There are some other programs which do a bit of cleaning, but not to my
satisfaction. The fact is that system keeps slowing down after some time.
In my case, by about 12-16 weeks' time, I've had enough. Some programmer
friends do such uninstalling routinely as well, but I don't know at what
periodicity.

[By the way, there is one small little freeware by Kevin Solway which I've
found pretty good for cleaning up un-needed .dll files -- "Clean System
Directory" : available at http://www.ozemail.com.au/~kevsol/sware.html].

Therefore, I "routinely" uninstall Win95 every 3/4 months. Then I wipe out
Win3.11, and clean up the root directory of my boot drive in which Win95
leaves all kinds of deposits which aren't removed by Win95 uninstall. After
that, I re-install Win 3.11 and subsequently, Win95.

With Win98, I've had occasion to do this only once (in another couple of
weeks or so, I should be doing this for the second time). I have to Fdisk
and format the boot hard drive, of course.

On my desktop, I have two hard disk drives : so I remove all my data to the
D: drive. Data on my laptop is kept on the hard drive. As a double
precaution, I also copy the data to Iomega Zip disks.

But I have to install all applications again with both Win95 and Win98.

Over the last year and a half, I've found this routine is much more
satisfactory. Even though it involves several hours of labour each time.

Since I *have* to live with all manners of wondrous gifts from Bill Gates,
I might as well take this trouble. But, hopefully, not for too long. As
soon as I can afford a Mac (they're substantially more expensive than IBM
PC's here in India)...... But Billy is there in Mac world too ! :)

>
>No.  Wait.  I take that back.  I recently downgraded from Windows95 to
>Windows98,  :))  and it was about the same, except that 98 runs much
>slower due to Bill Gate's perverse desire to try and confuse everyone
>about where their desktops end and the Internet begins.

Fortunately for me, IE4 and I are enjoying a fairly peaceful co-existence
-- I ignore it's existence, and IE4 hasn't bothered me so far. Am being a
bit stoic about the speed, though. :)

Cheers.


Shyamal


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Shyamal Gupta
25D, Selimpore Road, Calcutta 700 031. INDIA
Voice : 91-33-3440643
E-Mail : [log in to unmask]
          [log in to unmask]
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

                                  -----
        **Need help with PCSOFT mailing list? Send an Email to:**
        Bob Wright<[log in to unmask]> or Drew Dunn<[log in to unmask]>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV