Glen,

As one who has used both "extensively"...Enzo is absolutely
correct.  NT Workstation is now being targeted at the corporate
user and power users, however, in many offices upgrading,
Windows 95 is being installed on the workstation.  It recognizes
more devices, has better PNP support and handles home users and
the non-technical end-user better and more elegantly than NT
Workstation (3.51 or 4.0).

It is true that the registries between the two are different,
and are in the process of being merged so that they are the
same.  This is part of the process Microsoft is going through to
ensure that Windows 95 and Windows NT use the same API (although
they would be targeted to different users).  This will come with
NT 5.0 according to Microsoft.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
Joe Geiser
CSI Business Solutions
[log in to unmask]
(soon to be [log in to unmask])
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------

----------
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Win95 not intended for businesses?
> Date: Friday, December 06, 1996 4:26 PM
>
> In the December 2, 1996, issue of Computerworld, there's an
interview with
> Enzo Schiano, listed as Microsoft's Windows NT group product
manager.
> Here's a question and answer from page 65:
>
>         CW:     A common gripe among users is that they have
to reinstall
>                 all their applications from scratch when they
migrate from
>                 Windows 95 to Windows NT Workstation, and that
won't be
>                 fixed until NT 5.0 ships at least a year from
now. What
>                 do users do in the meantime?
>
>         Enzo:   We didn't intend for users to migrate from
Windows 95 to
>                 Windows NT Workstation 4.0 at this point. NT
Workstation
> ->              is positioned as a corporate desktop system.
But it's not
> ->              very forgiving for the home PC user.
>                 [snip example]
>
> --Glenn Cole
>   Software al dente, Inc.
>   [log in to unmask]