Heenan, Lambert
Lambert.Heenan at AIG.com
Wed Jul 9 11:49:30 CDT 2003
Not a lot :-) What's the difference between "Home version" and "Home release". And NT 4 came out well before Win 98 (July 1996 in fact). > -----Original Message----- > From: Drew Wutka [SMTP:DWUTKA at marlow.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 12:30 PM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD] OT: WinXP Personal > > I didn't mean that ME was a 'Home version' of W2k, what I meant was it was > the Home 'release' for Windows 2000. It was introduced about the same > time > as W2k, just like NT 4.0 and 98. Yes ME was built on 9x technology, XP > Home > is the first 'home' windows version that is actually built on NT > technology, > but it is built to emulate 9x functionality. Make sense? > > Drew > > -----Original Message----- > From: Heenan, Lambert [mailto:Lambert.Heenan at AIG.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 11:09 AM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD] OT: WinXP Personal > > > Nonsense. Millennium edition was just a tweaked version of Win 98. In no > way > could you call it a home version of Windows 2000, it has/had none of the > security features of W2K and the O/S kernel was essentially the same as > Win > 98, including the stupid 64k of resources (I believe) that were always > running out. About the only things the Millennium had in common with W2K > were it's ability to 'hide' important O/S files and it could run Media > Player 7.0. > > I agree with the rest of your comments though. XP Pro is the M$ effort to > keep the revenue coming in. W2K was too stable and people were getting > stuck > on it. So push out a new O/S, wait a 'decent' interval before withdrawing > support for W2K and at the same time introduce 'subscription' licenses. > There you go - a never ending stream of revenue. > > Lambert > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Drew Wutka [SMTP:DWUTKA at marlow.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 11:54 AM > > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > > Subject: RE: [AccessD] OT: WinXP Personal > > > > Actually, there was a Home version of Windows 2000, it was called > > MILLENIUM > > Edition. > > > > Also, Windows XP Pro does have a few features that are nice, but > comparing > > Windows 2000 to ANY of it's predecessors, including NT 4.0, and then > > comparing XP to 2k is like apples and oranges. 2k was a major > improvement > > in almost every way. XP is prettier, and has a few (very few) bonus > > features. The boot time on XP is nice, but quite frankly, who cares? I > > usually leave my machines on 99% of the time, so during that tiny 1%, 2k > > usually boots by the time I get a glass of water anyways! > > > > A lot of XP's 'bonus' features are also just features that were > available > > with relatively free software packages, such as Winzip, ZoneAlarm, etc. > > > > I'm not saying XP Pro is bad, I'm just saying it is not very impressive > > compared to it's predecessor. > > > > Also, for your 'example', look at Access. You have Access, then you > have > > the developers addition. Access is for everyone, including the 'Home' > > Users. The developers addition has extra features for the Experts. > > However, with Windows, you have the Server Edition, then you have 2 > client > > versions, a normal one, and a stripped down one. It would be like > selling > > an Access version that didn't have report or query capabilities. > > > > Just my 2 cents > > > > Drew > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Haslett, Andrew [mailto:andrew.haslett at ilc.gov.au] > > Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 8:10 PM > > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > > Subject: RE: [AccessD] OT: WinXP Personal > > > > > > 1. Never said *you* bought XP Home, nor was referring to you in my > > comments. > > 2. Define the *huge* amount of functionality that XP Home doesn't have. > > 3. You seem to have a lot of knowledge on the product (XP) considering > you > > dont use it. > > 4. The reason Win2k Pro had all those features was because there was no > > clear distinction in the home/server product lines at that stage. > > 5. Users who are not smart enought to work out where everything has > > 'moved' > > to in XP can change the layout to classic 2K mode. > > 6. I was referring to other vendors operating systems when comparing > > features, not Windows. > > > > Just sick of people bagging software to which they either have limited > > amount of knowledge, have had a bad experience which warps there > opinions > > or > > are simply MS bashers. > > > > The fact remains it is the HOME version of a product. It shouldn't have > > these features. The web server is a perfect example. The majority of > users > > will never use it. Worse still, some of them might turn it on by > > accident, > > opening up a huge number of vulnerabilities. > > > > It would be great to buy the cheapest version of a product and get all > the > > features. Unfortunately, we live in the real world and thats not how > > businesses operate. If I was the CEO of one of these business I should > be > > fired. > > > > (I can't believe my 'middle of the range' Holden Commodore doesn't have > > SunRoof, Power Windows, Heated Mirrors & Seat Position Memory - the top > > model does!) > > > > Regards, > > Andrew > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Colby [mailto:jcolby at colbyconsulting.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, 9 July 2003 10:17 AM > > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > > Subject: RE: [AccessD] OT: WinXP Personal > > > > > > Take Win2K Professional, strip out 1/2 the functionality, add "pretty" > > graphics, move everything around to a different position so it annoys > the > > hell out of previous windows users and looks different, and call it XP > > Home. > > > > I run Win2K Pro on my desktops, and Win2K Server on my server. I bought > a > > Toshiba laptop with Win98 in Ireland (thanks Mark Breen) and IMMEDIATELY > > fdisked and installed Win2K Pro. This was November 1997. > > > > Where you get this "most stable version yet I cannot guess. And what, > > pray > > tell, is this "amazing functionality"? Win2K is ROCK SOLID. The only > > time > > I reboot is when I download bug fixes that require reboots. > > > > I didn't pay for the "extra features" with Win2K Pro. M$ stripped a > huge > > amount of functionality out when they created "Home". You end up with > the > > Win98 of the XP line - "sucky software for the ignorant". If that is > what > > you want, by all means buy it. > > > > Or just continue using Win2K? > > > > And I did NOT buy XP Home (and never will, thank you), and am not now > > complaining that I can't develop web pages on it. I am simply pointing > > out > > YET ANOTHER piece of missing functionality, in case some misguided > person > > should be contemplating their navel and trying to decide whether to buy > XP > > Home. DON'T DO IT! JUST SAY NO! ETC. ETC. > > > > John W. Colby > > www.colbyconsulting.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Haslett, > > Andrew > > Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 8:06 PM > > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > > Subject: RE: [AccessD] OT: WinXP Personal > > > > > > CASSINI is the web server included with the matrix. > > > > I don't see why people are bagging XP Home. Why should it include all > the > > features of XP Pro.. Thats why its called PRO!! > > > > Its a product designed for the average 'HOME' user of which most would > > never > > need to develop web pages. You can't base a product line on a majority. > > > > If people want extra features - pay for it! Its up to users to 'review' > a > > products features *before* buying it, so I've got no sympathy for people > > who > > have purchased HOME and now complain about not having a web server. > > > > XP is the most stable version yet (barring Win2003) and has amazing > > functionality compared to the other 'operating systems' available, yet > it > > receives much criticism of which *most* is undeserved. > > > > Cheers, > > Andrew > > ** comfortably sitting on the optimistic side of pessimism ** :=) > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > AccessD mailing list > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > > > IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ ******************** > > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may > > contain information protected by law from disclosure. > > If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender > > immediately and delete this email from your system. > > No warranty is given that this email or files, if attached to this > > email, are free from computer viruses or other defects. They > > are provided on the basis the user assumes all responsibility for > > loss, damage or consequence resulting directly or indirectly from > > their use, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not. > > _______________________________________________ > > AccessD mailing list > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > > AccessD mailing list > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com