🚀 go-pugleaf

mattn@engdns.bandley1.netmanage.com wrote:


>In Article<316C4EC8.400E@emi.net>, <orlo@emi.net> writes:
>> 
>> Fidelio wrote:
>> > 
>> > LewM@PacX.Com (Lewis Mettler) writes:
>> > 
>> > >Lisa Wang <lisa.wang@hydro.on.ca> wrote:
>> > 
>> > >If you want to go slow use NT.
>> > 
>> > >If you want unreliable operation use 95.
>> > 
>> > >If you rather go fast and be reliable you will have to use OS/2.
>> > 
>> > Fast and reliable, that sounds like Linux to me. Going fast until it
>> > suddenly crashes, with no applications to run, not supporting the most
>> > common hardware, that's OS/2.
>> > 
>> 
>> But, the question is...Can I load Win NT in a Win 95 directory? Will both
>> OS's be operational on my HD?

>	...sounds like a job for "System Commander"... :)

>	-Matt



Well, I have Windows for Workgroups 3.11 (with Win32s 1.25) AND
Windows 95 AND Windows NT server 3.51 (I develop software and burn
through a lot of CPU cycles testing routines) all running
interchangably on ONE 32-megabyte RAM system. All I do is use WIN NT's
bootup selector to choose NT or the other Windows, and hit F4 when
Win95 tries to start to launch WFW 3.11. It's prolly not quite as
simple this way as it could, but I have had not the first glitch. The
only quibble (and it's really more of a nitpick) is that I must reboot
to switch OSes, but that's par for the course, to coin a cliche...

The only real concern is if you decide to do a multi-OS configuration
with Windows of any version is to install each to a separate
directory. 

Also, if you copy all non-system DLLs and VBXes from your windows and
win system directories into your Win95 and Win95 system directories,
you can run any Win 3.x software withOUT having to reinstall any of
them!

For what it's worth...

DM