Goo luck! Windows 95 is quite finicky sometimes. 😥
In practice, it's either too old or too new
I'd only use it for two cases nowadays - nostalgia and exreme low-end hardware (386, 4-8MiB RAM: Win95 RTM).
Windows 98SE is not just an update, it's so much better:
Vastly improved memory managment, can run aligned programs directly from VCache, better ACPI support,
supports both VXD/WDM type drivers, can use KernelEx etc.
It also includes support for newer Dynamic Drive Overlays, if memory serves.
That being said, I can understand the idea of using Win95.
Though in practice, it's just what it is: An ugly, unstable mess.
I'd use 98lite or something, which uses the Win95 shell on Win98.
Edit: Please don't get me wrong, I kinda grew up with Win31/95 RTM, and have got some fond memories of both of them,
but especially Win95
stressed my nerves on anything beyond 386/486 (AT class) machines.
PCI/APIC and and ACPI support was not very mature, I think.
So yes, for just for fun/experiments it's fine, I guess.
But using it over longer time might be frustrating.. That's why posted this.
Performance wise, Win95 is a bit quicker, yes unless bigger programs are used.
Because, Win95 has a terrible memory management.
The swapfile gets bigger and bigger, too.
Win98/SE is much more friendly here.
So 98Lite might be best compromise. The Win95 shell/explorer is better performing than 98's.
"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel
//My video channel//