 |
 |
> >writes: Would you give up Windows 95 in return for Windows 97? It should > be out by...98? > P.S. I would not trade my 3.1 for 95 or 97. > Peace, John This is a perennial problem that, in one guise or another, never goes away. As soon as a new version or a new model of *anything* comes out, advertising will try to convince you that you can't do without it. Of course, as a computing teacher, I need Windows in each of its major versions, plus the software to run on it. However, as a consultant, I often recommend that a client keep their existing system. Why? Various reasons, including: 1. Their staff are already trained in its use. 2. They have a major investment in the hardware and software, and can't afford more. 3. Their mode of use doesn't warrant an upgrade. 4. New software invariably requires a hardware upgrade. Now that is not what hardware and software sellers would like me to say, but in this case, I am acting in the best interests of my client. Eventually, of course, upgrades must be made. This is true for cars, toasters, lawnmowers, whatever. Parts are no longer available, support ceases, etc. So it is for computer software and hardware. But if you can wait until proven technology is available, it can often be to your benefit. Remember Super 8 home movie film? Cartridge tapes? Two track stereo records? Beta video recorders? My recommendation? Use your present technology, if it suits your needs, but put a little aside for an eventual upgrade when it becomes a necessity, then buy proven technology. And ignore the slings and arrows of technophiles. :-) (Oh, by the way, no flame wars on this please; it is just a personal opinion, not a recipe for an economic scenario.) Jim * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * James F. Slattery, J.P., M.A.C.S. JandA Computing Consultancy E-mail: [log in to unmask] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *