|
|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: system ? | |||
| win2k |
  
|
7 | 30.43% |
| win9x |
  
|
10 | 43.48% |
| os 9 |
  
|
5 | 21.74% |
| os x |
  
|
1 | 4.35% |
| Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
5th March 2002
|
#1 |
|
rotorikTET
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: hh
Posts: 2,033
|
systems
systems
|
|
:: quote post :: |
|
10th March 2002
|
#2 |
|
rotorikTET
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: hh
Posts: 2,033
|
i didn't expect this result.
|
|
|
:: quote post :: |
|
10th March 2002
|
#3 |
|
Moppi
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Leeeptzsch
Posts: 930
|
thats because all of us are running a BASIC platform.
|
|
|
:: quote post :: |
|
11th March 2002
|
#4 |
|
ups
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: swamp
Posts: 1,681
|
maybe it would be better to split win9x and winxp.
winxp runs a win nt 5.1 kernel. win2k runs winnt5.0 so if i´m not wrong... |
|
|
:: quote post :: |
|
11th March 2002
|
#5 |
|
DrTentacleVtheCactusman
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 404
|
re split nt/xp Versus 9x would probably be better
|
|
|
:: quote post :: |
|
11th March 2002
|
#6 |
|
rotorikTET
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: hh
Posts: 2,033
|
hmm i haven't heard of too many technical differences between xp and 2k, except for the ANNOYING way xp treats the user. is there really an advantage in having this new kernel ?
|
|
|
:: quote post :: |
|
11th March 2002
|
#7 |
|
um...
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: glasgow
Posts: 328
|
i thought it was essentially a dumbed down and tarted up NT...
|
|
|
:: quote post :: |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
