rbarbier 0 Posted March 30, 2000 I think that uprgrading from 3.1 to 95 was a lot harder upgrade for everything. Drivers and software and hardware. OH NO. NO DOS! Games suck in Windows Windows will never run games as good as Dos. Look at Doom 1 and 2. Games will never look this good on Windows But seriously remember all the headaches going to 95. Just doesn't seem the same with 2000. I am more happy with the move from 98 to 2000 then from 3.1 to 95. What do you all think? Share this post Link to post
FrogMaster 0 Posted March 30, 2000 You are right man! A lot of people seem to have less memory than they have in their boxes. I remember it was a real pain at the beginning to have everything run under Win95. Just imagine we are next year: dual 1 GHz machines with Quake 4 or Unreal 2 running 200 fps at 1600x1200 in 32-bit with FSAA, T&L, stereo support, anything you are dreaming of... Those who flame W2K just piss me off. Let them play with gameboyz/girlz Share this post Link to post
Spastic Computer Guru 0 Posted April 6, 2000 I highly agree the only problem w/ the 2K upgrade was I had to replace my video card, but hey it was old and needed to be replaced any way. Bonus Share this post Link to post
