>>I agree, Gary, that myself and a couple of other were exceptions. All that
>>I have been reading suggests that IE4 is nothing short of a nightmare for
>>most people. It was beautiful for me but extremely unreliable starting up
>>and shutting down. I now believe that the real reason MS postponed Win98
>>was because IE4 was integral to it and IE4 is not even a good beta yet. I
>
>Interesting theory. It certainly makes sense.
>
>>don't see how anyone running this software (or testing it) at MS could have
>>allowed it out the door in its present situation. The person who approved
>>the release of IE4 has a serious case bad judgement. Some might even say
>>insanity. mmmm. a thought occurred to me -- what if it was someone
>>intent on destroying MS?
>
>If bad software could bring down MSFT, Windows would have done so a long
>time ago. <g>
>
>
>Gary J. Sibio

One thing that I've seen is that MS doesn't seem to test its software thoroughly except on 'dedicated' computers. Those of us with 2 or 3 boot systems, multiple (physical and logical) hard disks, a combination of SCSI and IDE for drives, tape drives, etc. are the ones who run into problems. People with 1 drive, just Win95, etc. seem to run even the beta test software OK.

Barbara