[Aahz] > Yup, this is precisely why I never considered trying to do serious dev > work on Windows. It's not *that* hard. The worst part of heavy development on Win98 is the time it takes for frequent forced reboots; the rest is comparatively minor. > I think this kind of thing is much more amenable to automation on > Unixes, Especially when the project is primarily developed by Unix weenies <wink>. If it were built on COM automation, the Unixoids would be crawling on their bellies. > but I also think the NT-class OSes do better, too. Oh yes. Far fewer reboots, and a much stronger native shell. > Have you considered switching to Win2K for your dev work and just > testing under Win98? I use Win2K on my office box. For home use, I still prefer Win98 for everything except development. I've been toying with setting up a Linux box at home, but the time it would take to get that all hooked up and working, then maintained over time, has so far seemed too depressing to overcome.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4