ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like W98SE?



In a message dated 03/08/2001 6:42:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
elbow@microsoft.com writes:

<< "Top 10 Reasons to Move to Windows 2000 Professional":
 http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/professional/solutions/toptenupgr
 ade.asp >>

I don't run a business or NT workstations and already run WinMe, which to my 
understanding is the consumer version of Windows 2000 Professional.  My point 
was that maybe MS is pushing 2000 because of its price tag ($300?) or more?  
I think it is a case of the "latest and greatest" syndrome even if all 
(most?) of us don't need it.  Rob already pointed out that 2000, WinMe, and 
98SE all have the same color management.  WinMe runs fine for me and doesn't 
crash at all.  I'm basically trying to let someone convince me why 2000 is 
better than WinMe, but I may not be "professional" enough to understand.
Ed   




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.