|
Joe Pluta wrote: > It's the trend. IBM doesn't support 6-year-old versions of OS/400, so > why would they do the same for Windows? Because of the vast numbers of installs of OS' like W98. To me, there isn't any comparison between how OS/400 has changed in 6 years compared to how Windows has changed in 6 years. Think about all of the things you can do with OS/400 now that you couldn't do then. Now think of what a user would be missing out by staying on W98. If I could, I'd have stayed with the combo of W98se and Office 97 for quite some time in the future. Nothing in the new systems offers any justifiable benefits. > Me, I'm worried they're going to drop support for W2K Pro, since I > have > so far managed to avoid the move to XP. Yet, they have decided to retain support of Windows NT instead of W98. I don't get it. Bill
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
