Windows 95 is a huge step up from Windows 3.1. Unfortunately, that's not much of a compliment. Windows 3.1 is so unstable, so clumsy and so limited that it's no surprise the world is awaiting its successor. My advice? Wait! Unless you already have a high-horsepower machine, you have absolutely no reason to rush. Let's look piece-by-piece at what Windows 95 offers: Interface and cosmetic changes: An "A." It's worlds better than old Windows.
It's fast and easy to get a database manager, word processor or spreadsheet open, and you can quickly flip between them with the new task bar along the bottom. The "Explorer" utility for scanning directories, however, seems crippled by the troubled legacy of the old File Manager. The new look should be an easy switch for experienced Windows 3.1 users. Taking advantage of the new advanced features, however, is going to require training.
The desktop is simple and uncluttered, but offers a more powerful configuration than the old Windows Program Manager. If there is a program you want to use all the time, you can drag the icon right to the desktop. There is also a shortcut wizard for just about everything. They work smoothly and easily. Another "A." Another cosmetic change is long file names. They are nice, but Microsoft is only catching up to what Macintosh and OS/2 have had for years.
Stability: The bane of old Windows is the GPF (General Protection Fault) error message, which trashes everything you have not saved and triggers the three-finger reboot salute. The next worse nightmare is the Out of Memory allegation, even when you know there is plenty left, but Windows does not know where to look to find it. Windows 95 is a big improvement. It uses a better memory management system to keep programs from tripping over each other and crashing the system.
But, and it's a big but, the big improvement in stability only kicks in with new 32-bit software programs, which are just now being written. If you use Windows 95 to run your old 16-bit software, you will still be susceptible to the rogue GPF demon. While it's better than Windows 3.1, Windows 95 still did not adopt the level of crash protection in the Windows NT or OS/2. Both run sessions in the entirely separate "virtual machines," so if one goes down, the others are protected.
Windows 95 can still collapse altogether because of one errant program. Windows 95 can break a program into multiple "threads" that can be handled separately. So while a thread handles printing or dialing the phone, you can keep working on something else. Fast promises await. But, as with stability, these improvements will only emerge in full strength when new software is written to take advantage of multiple threads.
Running old 16-bit software just drags the system down to the old level. To explain, a 32-bit pathway is simply twice as big as a 16-bit pathway used by Windows 3.1. If the processor can handle twice as much information at once, the system gets a spectacular improvement in performance. So Windows 95 should be twice as fast as old Windows. And someday it probably will be. But not right away. The reason is that all the software programs have to be rewritten in 32-bit form.
When 16-bit software runs through the 32-bit Windows 95, the extra space is just wasted. In fact, it often slows things down. Rewriting won't be as easy as you might guess. Software can do with one big 32-bit word than it otherwise might have done with a few little 16-bit words. It's similar to spoken language: A witty speaker can elegantly use one big word to replace lots of little words. But a lot of people only sound silly when they try to show off with big words.
Past history has shown that the first version of 32-bit software can be very clunky. The first 32-bit programs will be appearing this fall. The next generation may emerge by spring of summer of 1996. Plug and play: The new system can automatically recognize hardware such as sound cards, CD-ROM players, printers, scanners and modems. That means a lot less hassle setting them up. Great thing. Don't be surprised if it does not work with old hardware, but I had good success on the test machines I used.
Internet and online: Windows 95 comes with a connection to Microsoft Network built right in. Patterned after commercial services like prodigy and America Online, it will offer a basket full of attractions. It's a for-pay service. System requirements: The downside of all the wonderful things Windows 95 offers is that you need more machine to make them happen. Windows 95 will run with four megabytes, but you won't like it.
There's no point having a Ferrari that only runs in first gear. You will need eight megabytes to be happy and 12 to 16 to really see what Windows 95 can do. Adding eight meg of RAM will cost you about $370. You will also need more disk space to hold the bigger operating system and the fatter 32-bit programs that you will want to run on it. A 540-megabyte hard drive is enough to skimp by. Think about a gigabyte or more if you like to run lots of different software.
You can run Windows 95 with any 386 processor or better. Once again, however, the real advantages do not emerge until you are pumped into the stronger 486 and Pentium machines. If you are thinking about upgrading and you need to kick up the RAM, storage and processor, you are almost definitely better off thinking about a new machine. Also, a CD-ROM (at least double-speed) and sound card with speakers allow you to take advantage of improved multimedia features.
Microsoft should have a Windows 95 upgrade with bug fixes by winter. By then, there will be more 32-bit software available, anyway, so you will not have lost much by holding off.