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?



ME is a slight tweak of Windows 98 and hasn't much to do with Windows 
2000. They share a new unified device driver model, but that merely means 
that you are less likely to find hardware that works on both at the moment 
:-(

Bigboy9955@aol.com () wrote:

> 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/topten
> upgr
>  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.