On Dec 5, 2007 6:19 PM, Jeffrey Ollie <<a href="mailto:jeff@ocjtech.us">jeff@ocjtech.us</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On 12/5/07, <a href="mailto:jrnosee@gmail.com">jrnosee@gmail.com</a> <<a href="mailto:jrnosee@gmail.com">jrnosee@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> 'tis why I'm still on XP. Although some of the more recent things I've read
<br>> have shown Vista's gaming speeds are slowly catching up to XP. I wonder how<br>> Vista SP1 will handle it?<br><br></div>A friend at work told me that XP SP3 beta was still way faster than Vista SP1.<br></blockquote>
</div><br clear="all">I installed Windows for Workgroups 3.11 on DOS 6.22 in a vmware instance the other day. The entire operating system used less RAM than vim and booted in about 15s. That's *with* Office v4's mom in the startup group. Fast? You bet. This system screams.
<br><br>Oh how I don't miss the 16bit days.<br>-- <br>Matthew Nuzum<br>newz2000 on freenode