According to Denys Beauchemin:
>
[snip]
> I forgot to mention, I put Win95 on my 486/66 with 16 megs and it does seem
> much faster than WFWG 3.11.  I did get the companion MSPLUS.
>
 
We have Win95 on a 486/66 w/16M, a 386/DX w/8M and a Penitum 100 w/32M
and it runs faster than WFWG on all three! Dos programs seem to benefit
the most. Of course, 32-bit replacement programs are often faster.
 
Networking with the built-in clients is *much* faster than Novell's VLMs.
 
Printing (that is, how soon you get back the application when it sends
a processes a print file) is *much* faster.
 
HP's new OpenDesk Win GUI seems to run just find on it, also.
 
> Question to the list:  I find Win95 to be disc space consuming, do you find
> the same?
>
 
Win95 seems to use 15% to 25% more disk than WFWG - but it depends *a lot* on
what options you install.
 
- As to plans for implementation:
We will be installing Win95 on PCs in our new multi-media computer lab
as soon as we can. We expect reductions in technical support time&effort
and even more savings in initial configuration and setup of the PC. Most
new PCs we purchase will be required to have win95. As we network more
groups on campus, we expect to move them from Dos/Win3.1 to Win95 at
the same time.
 
--
-- - - - Speaking for myself and not necessarily anybody else - - - - - -
Richard Gambrell        | Internet: [log in to unmask]
Mgr. Tech. Services     | POT:      504-483-7454     FAX: 504-482-1561
Xavier University of LA | Smail:    7325 Palmetto, New Orleans, LA 70125