>>Going back to my original point, I thought that Win2K, nee' NT 5.0, was supposed to unite all of the Windows OS in one version. There wasn't going to be a successor to Win98 so there would be only one Windows. Has everyone here suddenly agreed that that goal is unobtainable and therefore unneeded?
>>
>A non-Win2K code-based replacement for Win98, Millenium, has been previously announced, with no firm ship date, but it'll be sometime next year. It will continue to use at least part of the Win9x kernal code.

That's my point. That we are now on track to have two different and widely distributed versions of Windows (Win2K and Millenium) for the foreseeable future. And that this situation is forced on us as much by the high price of Win2K as by any unresolvable technical issues.

Is this what you were expecting when NT 5.0 was announced some years ago?

Peter