On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 07:35:32AM -0700, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Your experience is completely contrary to mine wrt the speed of XP and > 98(SE). The speed at which a machine boots up is dependent upon what > programs and processes are being loaded and how well the disk is > maintained, how much total on-board memory there is, and how Windows is > configured. A lot of office machines run behind firewalls, and load > various anti-spyware and anti-virus programs that cause a machine to run > slower.
Plus, of course, on XP you don't need to do a cold boot - you can shut the machine down to "standby" mode, which comes back up instantaneously. (That's assuming your hardware supports standby mode, of course.) > Further, there's a lot more to using a DSLR these days than just being able > to have and use a USB connection. Shooting RAW (if that's what one chooses > to do) almost ~requires~ a fast USB 2.0 connection, and I'm not sure Win > 98(SE) supports that without the addition of additional USB cards. It won't. While Windows 98 SE added limited support for USB interfaces, it was almost entirely restricted to native USB support on the motherboard. There were a few third party vendors who wrote their own drivers, but I'd be prepared to bet these were only ever provided for early (USB 1) devices. > Further, the programs that one might want to use to edit and view their > work often requires a more recent version of Windows than 98(SE). I'm sure > there are some such programs out there that can run on 98(SE), but, > offhand, I don't know of any, or any that will run well over such old > software.
