by Ron Enderland

Has anything ever been the subject of so much hype as Windows 95? Of course, I'm not counting any of the last twenty, excuse me, XX Super Bowls (Note: the NFL has just informed all members of the media that in addition to using only Roman numerals to describe individual Super Bowls, a brief moment of respectful silence is to be observed at the end of any sentence in which they are mentioned.).

I first heard Win 95 mentioned in late 1993, as Microsoft's new system being developed under the code name of Chicago. According to the computer magazines, it was going to make systems run smoother, faster, more intelligently, and with greatly improved karma. Its estimated release would be in the fall of 1994.

Well, the fall of 1994 came and went. Now, we were promised that we'd be seeing it around early 1995. This didn't happen either. We missed it in the spring. Finally, in August 1995, we were able to get our hands on it.

I don't have any facts or figures on sales. I just know that I have a dozen or so computing friends. Of them, three have switched to Win 95. Among them (including myself), reactions are mixed.

One fellow likes it overall, but is disappointed with its memory hungry ways. That pretty well describes my feelings, too.

I have an IBM 486 SLC2-66 MHz system with 8 MB of RAM. It used to take Windows 3.11 about eight seconds to come up from DOS. Now, when I start Win 95 from a DOS prompt, it takes 62 seconds to load.

That in itself wouldn't be so bad, except that once loaded, everything takes longer. All of my programs that I once used with 3.11 take approximately twice as long to load now. I'm also running a couple of 32 bit programs, specifically Netscape Navigator 2.0 and WinZip 6.0, and they take about twice as long to load as did their 16 bit versions under 3.11.

That's the experience of two of us. Now, my other friend LOVES Win 95! He has absolutely nothing bad to say about it! He thinks it's the greatest thing since Super Bowl XVIII! (Moment of silence)

Why this positive attitude? Well, let's examine his system: IBM 486 Blue Lightning 100 Mhz processor (a little faster than mine, but similar architectures), sixteen MB of RAM.....Hold it! Sixteen megs of RAM? Now, THAT'S significant!

He is constantly raving about Win 95's ease of use, its speed (even using Drivespace to compress his hard drive), and its smooth running. And now you know why. Run this system under sixteen megs, and it's a beauty. As near as I can tell, it almost manages to live up to Microsoft's hype!

Well, what does that mean for me, the average computer user? All I have to do is go out and buy some more memory, and everything will be wonderful! Except.....well, my system has an ancient ISA motherboard. I have eight 30 pin SIMM slots. They're full of one meg SIMMs. So, I would need to either purchase four-four meg SIMMs, or else convert my one megs to four megs with adapters, and then purchase two more four meg SIMMs.

I've calculated the cost of the first option, and it would run $12,467.98. That's a little too high. The second option would only be $9,365.82. That's much more affordable, to be sure. But, I still can't afford it.

So, I guess I'll continue to muddle along in the slow lane at 386 speeds on the old superhighway. I just wish those cocky users with lots of RAM would quit laughing at me as they blast by!

Keep sending me your new acronyms! Read last month's column for the details. Thanks to Eric Liberatore (ericvl@aol.com) for this month's choice:

LUCK-Locked Up Computer Keyboard. A hidden feature that is included with every Windows 3.1 package (and, I might add, Windows 95) that will activate when you type in a certain combination of keystrokes. Never mind what they are, they can't be documented or duplicated. "Hey my computer stopped responding! Just my LUCK!"