Return To Windows 95, Xp Sucks.

[LonghornXP]

Okay let's hear it. Which is better windows 95 or windows XP pro? Face it win 95 takes up much less space on the disk and offers much in the way of performance. On modern machines Windows 95 flys. Cranks out faster, boots fastest, and takes less space.

Only down side is that it crashes more often, won't run many programs, drivers are extremely incompatible. Other than that, it does very well when you fix it.

Okay let's hear it.

[nicodareus]

If you think Windows 95 "flies," then you may as well run DOS 6.22. I am quite sure that DOS will suit your requirements of speed and disk space usage.

My personal preference is Windows XP over Windows 95 for compatibility with the latest technology, ease of use, and better security.

[Linx]

I still use Win98 because XP is 1) to large, 2) too slow, 3) too weird, 4) too weird :D

And the Win98 cd carries drivers for many old devices, where the XP cd seems to only have drivers for Microsoft certified crap. Had too buy new network cards because of that :blink:

[Steven]

Okay let's hear it. Which is better windows 95 or windows XP pro? Face it win 95 takes up much less space on the disk and offers much in the way of performance. On modern machines Windows 95 flys. Cranks out faster, boots fastest, and takes less space.

Only down side is that it crashes more often, won't run many programs, drivers are extremely incompatible. Other than that, it does very well when you fix it.

Okay let's hear it.

Unsupported By Microsoft, Unsupported for software creation by many companies, Windows 98 is on its way out too...

[Spyder Veteran]

Okay let's hear it. Which is better windows 95 or windows XP pro? Face it win 95 takes up much less space on the disk and offers much in the way of performance. On modern machines Windows 95 flys. Cranks out faster, boots fastest, and takes less space.

Only down side is that it crashes more often, won't run many programs, drivers are extremely incompatible. Other than that, it does very well when you fix it.

Okay let's hear it.

are you for real? :unsure:

[Farchord]

going back on Win95 or 98 would be for me like going in hell LOL :D

[ramesees]

exactly what I was thinking Spyder!

You are trying to compare a buggy, old, OS which essentially started the 9x kernel (not counting 3.1 and DOS) to the latest incarnation of the NT kernel :laugh:

[Darrian]

Some people are just afraid of change...

[ramesees]

Change in this case is defintely for the better :D

[tomwarren Veteran]

Okay let's hear it. Which is better windows 95 or windows XP pro? Face it win 95 takes up much less space on the disk and offers much in the way of performance. On modern machines Windows 95 flys. Cranks out faster, boots fastest, and takes less space.

Only down side is that it crashes more often, won't run many programs, drivers are extremely incompatible. Other than that, it does very well when you fix it.

Okay let's hear it.

are you for real? :unsure:

Summed it up perfectly :laugh:

[m4ch1n3g0d]

You know, i think any os can handle what i normaly do on a computer. Any windows be it 95/98, even ME, but windows xp is just so fun and pretty. I was on a win95 computer today, and it looked horrible. I want beauty, eyecandy, sexy looking desktops. I want special effects and all that other crap. Right now my computer looks so damn sexy .... oh baby!!!

Seriously though, xp is more compatable now for newer programs, and im the type of person that wants the latest software. XP is great.

[Jessterw]

:blink: Had to do a double take when I read the thread title... I mean really, Windows 95 versus Windows XP? Windows 98, ME, NT 4, 2000 maybe... (big maybe one the first 3), but 95? :x Excuse me while I was the bad taste out of my mouth :D

Oh wait... I get it... can a mod move this to the Jokes forum :p

[thingsforjason]

goodness. windows 98 vs me. xp vs me. 98 vs xp, 95 vs xp.

how about windows 3.11 for workgroups versus windows 95 (1st release, not osr2)?

:dead: (dang, whatever happened to that smiley?)

[JK1150]

I agree in two aspects, if u r gonna run something like put a flash animation for ur company and use the comp as a tour guide or something use Win95 as it doesn't take much and doesn't get in the way of something like that. Also, if u r using 95 for a program in a lab or something, going to 98XP etc. wouldn't really be nessecary if it is all working well

[Joswin]

Apart from Windows 95 having almost zilch support for USB, no support for firewire, no support (or flaky at best) support for AGP i think ill have to say XP. lol.

[username]

Okay let's hear it. Which is better windows 95 or windows XP pro? Face it win 95 takes up much less space on the disk and offers much in the way of performance. On modern machines Windows 95 flys. Cranks out faster, boots fastest, and takes less space.

Only down side is that it crashes more often, won't run many programs, drivers are extremely incompatible. Other than that, it does very well when you fix it.

Okay let's hear it.

your computer sucks thats why

werent you the same guy bragging how you had Longhorn and how fast is was lol

[L33T P3N1S]

i love it, but i hate the taste

[Mark Otto]

XP boots in a matter of less than 20 seconds...I have never seen another OS boot that fast on my PC. XP is all the much more better from my eyes...it is a matter of opinion though.

[dARKSTAr]

I think this is one of the strangest threads i've seen at Neowin. To be serious for a moment though, if someone was going to say that they were considering going back to a previous operating system, the only one that for me would be a viable option is 2K. There is no way i would ever go back to the 9X series. :wacko:

[thingsforjason]

...

Only down side is that it crashes more often, won't run many programs, drivers are extremely incompatible.

...

translation: Only down side is that it sucks. :D

[JK1150]

your computer sucks thats why

I don't really see ur Athlon 1600+ with 256MB RAM breaking any records, so let's not turn this into a flame war. Like I said, 95 still has it's good uses, and it was a very good OS back in it's time. Sadly, it has a large lack of support, I even tried to install it on the comp in my sig (just for the hell of it) and it wouldn't let me b/c it would support like nothing my comp had. 95 is very fast you have to admit, it is like win98 without all the M$ junk, but for all u that want Win95 back but don't want all that junk that makes it just as slow, try 98Lite, works pretty well. Hardware support of 98, with the look, feel, and speed on 95

[Martog]

Alright, alright, we are dropping 95 vs XP.

We are now debating Windows 1.0 vs Windows XP. Lets get it started!! LOL :D :cool: :laugh:

[deimos]

yeah, i still need to get my hands on a copy of windows 1.0 :p

[LiGhTfast]

i had 1.11 i think somewere, weighs in at about 700kb me thinks might give it a boot

u think i will dual boot with xp?

[wildliquid]

Face it win 95 takes up much less space on the disk and offers much in the way of performance. On modern machines Windows 95 flys. Cranks out faster, boots fastest, and takes less space.

if you have a modern computer you probably wouldnt have an issue with room :huh: xp for me