🚀 go-pugleaf

Summers@Ethyl-the-Frog.ARC.NASA.gov (David P. Summers) wrote:


>They run, if you don't want to use the new features.  If you are
>still going to be stuck with 8 character file names, why bother?

There are several products which rememdy this not- Name IT, Norton
Navigator, and another one.  They all claim to give Win95 dialogues to
old 16-bit apps.  Makes you wonder why Microsoft found it so
difficult.


>> Under Win 3.1 I 
>> frequently run into situations where I can't Alt-Tab to another application 
>> because the app I'm in won't release the CPU.

>If FTP'd, done spreadsheet calculations, etc. in the background and
>not had this problem.  I guess what is being fixed is the mediocre
>programming in the Windows world rather than a real problem.

True.  It was likely partly my use of WFWG, the avoidance of switching
to real-mode for file access and the improved comm drivers made WFWG a
pretty acceptable multitasker actually- observe the latest PC Mag OS
comparisons when WFWG performed pretty well.  I don't think 3.1 users
realized what a nice upgrade WFWG was- didn't help than Microsoft
marketed it like crap.  Yes folks, even Microsoft can screw up
marketing.

95 however, can handle multitasking with a lot of disk thrashing far
better than any previous version of Windows. IDE is a processor hog,
EIDE helps somewhat but we'll have to see what Intel's bus-mastering
solution can do once they finally release the drivers for 95.  But in
WFWG or 3.1, long disk access, such as loading up a large program
would halt the transfer before it's complete.  I've unzipped, even
been ultrapacking my D: drive and consistently getting 1600 cps in my
DOS comm program with 95 and my DX2-66 with 8 megs.