On Feb 23, 10:32*am, wrote:
On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 08:06:02 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:









On Feb 21, 11:19*am, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
...sneak into wherever his computer is and take photos of his screen
showing he is using either Windows 2.1 or Windows 95 on his 8088-based
computer with the three foot deep, 15" green phosphor monitor.

Threaten to post photos.

Should be worth at least a buck from Tim. *

Actually my computer was built in about 2003 and is loaded with
windows 2000 and my monitor *is a Compaq FS740

http://images.quebarato.com.mx/T440x...40+17+como+nue...

--

No, there's nothing really 'modern' about it. it doesn't even have a
cd burner in it. * But it's good enough for what I do with it.

Somewhere around here I still have a laptop that has AOL 3.0 on it
from the early 90's.

One thing about ancient monitors is that if it gives me any problems,
I go to the local pawnshop and get another for about *$5.00 and I'm
good to go, again.

But I did move into the 21st century a bit. I splurged and got a new
printer/scanner. a HP "Officejet J4540 All-in-one"

What's wrong with Windoze 98? Just about the time they got all he bugs
out they released XP and we are about 100 updates into that.
Microsoft is 3 versions of Windoze later (Vista, 7 & 8) and it is all
bloated bugware that will be replaced about the time they get it
fixed.

I take that back, Greg. It is windows XP office edition and not 2000
I have another ancient box that has '96 on it though. I used it on
dial-up. might break it back out and take it to the shop for
recordkeeping etc.