|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Mr. Smith
You may be not sarcastic but I think you missed the point. I was trying to be
very polite by not offending the victim of his system.
And I think your confusing anecdotal with empirical evidence. In any case the
point was if he was running Win95 successfully and upgraded to Win98 correctly
he wouldn't be having any degradation. By the way I have been programming and
putting together many different computers for many years. I did not want to get
into complexities because that was not needed. By all means I don't want to
sound like I know enough write a book. Any way no offense was taken and I hope
none given to you. Also, you're correct - this is getting off topic. :-)
Sean W. Smith wrote:
> Not to appear Sarcastic but obviosuly you have never programmed a computer
> and don't understand the underlying complexities that exist within. Your
> emprical evidence is based on a sample of 1 which is statistically
> insignificant. I could write a book on why your assumptions are wrong but
> its definitely off topic so I will leave it at that. Again, I don't mean to
> seem like a smart ass but you arguments are unfounded.
>
> sorry,
> Sean
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Thomas Duke
> > Sent: Thursday, July 09, 1998 4:48 PM
> > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: Windows 98
> >
> >
> > I just don't understand. I have Win98 and it works just fine - no
> > problems at
> > all and you have a nightmare. Unless you have a defective copy of Win98 it
> > should work. From my personal empirical evidence Win98 works
> > (it's a fact).
> > Maybe your computer set up is incorrect - you must of had
> > problems with Win95. I
> > know of no cards or drivers that worked with '95 not working under '98. I
> > installed Win98 over '95 and all programs and files work the same
> > or better.
> > Take your copy back for an exchange (hopefully your not using a beta or
> > blackmarket copy) because as said, it's a fact, Win98 works.
> >
> > Alton Stephens wrote:
> >
> > > Donald Webster is right. Windows 98 has been an absolute
> > nightmare. Had to
> > > buy a new video card because original card would not recognize higher
> > > resolutions anymore and no driver updates worked- period.
> > Worse, Internet
> > > connections are completely blasted, and I will now have to do a
> > third clean
> > > install of Win 98 in order to fix this- our firm's computer
> > consultants have
> > > spent all day with the computer and have done everything
> > possible to correct
> > > the prob, to no avail.
> > >
> > > Win 98 is a hit or miss proposition- you may be lucky and
> > happy, or you may
> > > be maximally screwed, and you have no control over it.
> > >
> > > If Win 95 is working, then skip Win 98.
> > >
> > > Alton Stephens
> > > astephen@xxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Harley Meyer
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 1998 11:31 PM
> > > > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: Re: Windows 98
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your problem here is the screen resolution. Just change it.
> > > >
> > > > Harley
> > > >
> > > > Myron B. [Bruce] Slomka wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Sean W. Smith wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > betcha you did a update install.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > try format C:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > then install...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > will work much better then. Carrying along all your old
> > > > problems will not
> > > > > > result in a more stable system...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sean
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> > Donald Webster
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 09, 1998 5:22 AM
> > > > > > > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Windows 98
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Has anyone taken the plunge on Windows 98? If so what is
> > > > your opinion
> > > > > > > >of it and is it worth the money?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have installed (and re-installed) Win98 and wish I
> > hadn't. I was
> > > > > > > told it was more robust and would prevent crashes. Wrong! It
> > > > > > > screwed up several programs including an Internet connection. In
> > > > > > > discussion with the ISP helpdesk guru, he said it had caused a
> > > > > > > large number of problems for them and he certainly would not be
> > > > > > > installing it on his computer. Since installing it, my
> > machine slips
> > > > > > > into an apallingly slow mode, performing like an old XT. IMHO it
> > > > > > > is a dead loss and I certainly will not be recommending it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > DMW
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Your're right on about installing from the start after
> > > > reformatting the C: drive. I did that on my laptop and it
> > worked fine.
> > > > >
> > > > > I just upgraded my desktop OS from Windows95 and it still
> > crashes; in
> > > > > addition i have a boot up sequence that lost some files and
> > the start up
> > > > > looks for connections that requires me to hit the space bar
> > 4 times to
> > > > > complete the boot process.
> > > > >
> > > > > An interesting thing happens to MS 6.5 under Windows98.
> > > > > All of the stock containing directories no show Name,
> > Symbol, and first
> > > > > and last dates of data for each security but scroll
> > vertically instead
> > > > > of horizontally. This makes it more difficult to locate stocks by
> > > > > scrolling through the list. Has anybody else noticed this?? I
> > > > > contacted equis support for a fix. I'm not aware of
> > changing the set up
> > > > > of these directory listings although anythoing can happen
> > by hitting the
> > > > > wrong key.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bruce Slomka
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\vcard3.vcf"
|