Latest version of Mosiac for Windows -Reply

[Allan Mikkelsen]

On Thu, 21 Dec 1995 08:48:23 -0800, you wrote:

>As a gov't. agency that can't roll-out Netscape w/o paying the license fee, and
>as an agency dealing with a 25% budget reduction, we have installed Mosaic
>(Final Release, 2.0) on about 90 PCs and 40 Macs.  The Mac version is

We do not have Macs, but have installed on Win 3.1 PCs for the exact
same reasons - free licences.

>relatively stable but certainly has the limitations as Peter outlined.  Windows
>has most of the same limitations.  Windows users also get frequent Win32
>errors. (We have installed the latest Win32 add-on to DOS.)  Mosaic also
>takes more  RAM and resources.  Many of our users with 8MB find they
>cannot have more than one, or any, other program open or Mosaic won't
>load.  (Netscape is more stable in a 16 bit environment and takes far less
>RAM/resources.)  I should note that using Mosaic at home under Win '95 is
>fairly stable.  We won't install Win '95 in our agency but will wait until the NT
>upgrade (aka Cairo) is available.  This may solve some of our problems.   I'd
>be interested if others are having the Win32 errors, assuming someone out
>there is still using Mosaic....

Approximately half our attempts to load Mosaic result in Win32s errors
which require a cold boot of the PC to fully recover.  This seems to
be related to what has been run before starting Mosaic.  The only way
to reduce these problems is to do a cold boot before and after using
Mosaic.  This makes it almost unusable for any productive work.

The Win95 and NT versions apear to be much more stable and worth use,
but the Win 3.1 is junk, IMHO.

Allan Mikkelsen,  Industry Commission,   Australia
amikkels at pop.indcom.gov.au