<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:osnews="http://osnews.com/rss2#">
	<channel>
		<title>OSNews: </title>
		<link>http://www.osnews.com/story/18937/EDE_1_2_Released</link>
		<description>Exploring the Future of Computing</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams</copyright>
		<webMaster>adam+nospam@osnews.com</webMaster>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:26:55 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		
		<item>
			<title>Hmm</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?284911</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?284911</guid>
			<description>It looks like Windows 95.<br />
<br />
However, does it run on a 486 with 8-16 MB RAM like Windows 95?<br />
<br />
Today's Windows is a resource hog but back then it was pretty reasonable.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 21:33:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Xaero_Vincent)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Hmm</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?284929</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?284929</guid>
			<description>Yes, it looks like Win95.<br />
<br />
But back then, Win95 was a resource hog, too.<br />
<br />
Most computers of that time had only 4MB RAM, so that everyone who bought the new and shiny Win 95 box in 1995, was also forced to buy a new piece of at least 4MB RAM. And in these days RAM was very expensive.<br />
<br />
And, by the way, on a 486-66MHz machine with 8 to 16 MB RAM, OS/2 Warp 3 was lightyears ahead of &quot;Chicago&quot;.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (nelvana2005)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: Hmm</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?284951</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?284951</guid>
			<description>I have to disagree with you. Back then computers had 16-32MB RAM. I had an old Cyrix 76MHz or something like that with 16MB RAM...running Win95</description>
			<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 05:54:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (OSGuy)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: Hmm</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?284962</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?284962</guid>
			<description>If my memory serves me right, 32MByte is unrealistic for Late 1995 / 1996. High end computers had (at least here in Austria) 16MByte available.<br />
<br />
I remember when I had to invest ATS 4200 (without inflation ~ 300EUR ) to get another 4MByte RAM in August 96 for my anno 1994, middle class 486DX40 with 4MB RAM in order to boot/install Windows 95. The money was almost half of my first salary, and I still keep the (laminated) invoice, for sentimental reasons.  The machine came with Win 3.11 preinstalled, and I had no problems running an educational licensed copy of OS/2 Warp 3 (IIRC), whereas Win95 choked at the installation.<br />
<br />
A friend of mine purchased a top-notch computer in autumn 1995 (again, if my memory serves me right) for approx. 40000 ATS (Pentium 90, 16MByte RAM, 17&quot; CRT Monitor, Scanner, 1MByte SVGA -&gt; He was doing some serious CAD stuff) and Win95 performed indeed very well on this box. I can remember the details because I helped him to select the components and when he calculated the amount of money this machine would cost, he invited me for dinner :-)<br />
<br />
Ah, those old times</description>
			<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 14:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (setec_astronomy)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>1995</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?284969</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?284969</guid>
			<description>My computer in 1995/6 was a Pentium 100 with 32MB RAM.<br />
<br />
Anyway, does anyone actually know the sytem requirements of EDE?<br />
<br />
I still have a 486DX4, 20MB RAM laptop.Edited 2007-11-17 17:29</description>
			<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 17:24:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Xaero_Vincent)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: 1995</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?284993</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?284993</guid>
			<description>Iven if it will work on this machine, what is the rest? Is there a very lightweight webbrowser? But graphic one, not links or something (dillo don`t support to much of todays web standards). Without good graphic webbrowser it`s hard to use old pc as easy and cute desktop.</description>
			<pubDate>Sun, 18 Nov 2007 10:44:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Lukasz)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
