2 ms·
Windows 95 was definitely better for MS users, but it was really just patching a hole in a single company's product line. Macs were far more solid than Win 95/
by astrashe2 3mo ago
Windows 95 was definitely better for MS users, but it was really just patching a hole in a single company's product line. Macs were far more solid than Win 95/98/SE at the time, and things like Sun Sparc 5s were more solid than Macs. Before people were getting hit with security problems all the time, they used to go years without rebooting Unix servers.
It was more like one company with a stranglehold on the market was terrible. The intensity of that has waxed and waned, but that's been true from then all the way until now.
- wmf 3mo agoIt depends what you mean by solid. System 7.5 was slower and less reliable than Windows 95 but its usability was slightly better.
- jghn 3mo agoHeck, for a lot of activities, NT 4.0 was better than Win 95. And while NT4 came out after 95, it was the same relative time period.
- linsomniac 3mo ago>they used to go years without rebooting Unix servers A coworker was getting ready to do a RAM upgrade on a Solaris system that hadn't been rebooted in multiple years. I suggested to him: Before you do the RAM upgrade, try just rebooting the box to make sure it comes up WITHOUT the RAM upgrade. The day after the upgrade he came to me: "That was brilliant! We rebooted the box and it didn't come back up, it saved us time debugging why the RAM upgrade broke the system."