I cannot imagine a good excuse for Win95 in that P-II box. Maybe for a 32 MB total (EDO) RAM DX4-486/100 . . (whuch I do happen to have).

My point of view in this case. Is that Windows 98 SE is probably the best solution there. But anyway those were my two cents.

The only reason I can think off the top of my head why Win95 maybe preferable over Win98 would be compatibility.

If a significant number of your games were designed for Win95, then put Win95 and be done with it, should be quite fast on your rig. DirectX versioning may be a factor too between Win95 or Win98 (say DX 3/5/6 for W95?).

Otherwise, if you just care about getting most of your Win9x games to work, and assuming they're happy with DX7 or 8.1, then 98 SE is the way to go.

win2k/w95c dualboot usually works for me. Win2k is faster than 98 on my p2 233 though, at Wintune95 especially

If you didn't have AGP and USB, go with 95 OSR2.5. But with a P2B, I'd go with 98SE.

Win2K won't work well with games of those days, and it really needs more than 256 MB RAM.

well, plopping win2k on it is quite nice for swapping the role of the computer to a data recovery one with more network stability 😀

slipkord wrote:

The only reason I can think off the top of my head why Win95 maybe preferable over Win98 would be compatibility.

If a significant number of your games were designed for Win95, then put Win95 and be done with it, should be quite fast on your rig. DirectX versioning may be a factor too between Win95 or Win98 (say DX 3/5/6 for W95?).

Makes me wonder: anyone ever tried a successful Win98/Win95 dual boot?

leileilol wrote:

win2k/w95c dualboot usually works for me. Win2k is faster than 98 on my p2 233 though, at Wintune95 especially

😳 I thought W2K eats up more resources than Win9x?

You can disable quite a few services of Win2000 which gives more memory.