Windows or Bust?

I was surprised by the cover story of your issue of December 5, 1995, "The Top 103 Windows Machines." Is there a new breed of PCs that works only with Windows? As far as I know, each of the 103 PCs reviewed can work with DOS, Linux, and, yes, even OS/2. I would also like to recommend that for future product comparisons, you include one or two native OS/2 or Linux equivalents. As we all know, there are PC users using operating systems other than Windows 3.x and Windows 95. Your attention to that group of users would be greatly appreciated.

    T.T. Chua
    via the Internet

I have been an avid PC Magazine reader for years. When I purchased my current computer (a 386/20) I pored over the reviews in PC Magazine until I found the best system at the best price. Now, almost seven years later, I need to upgrade. So again, I spent the better part of a weekend poring over the reviews of Pentium PCs in your issue of December 5, 1995. I have not seen such a poorly architected bunch of systems since the original 386 came out. The architecture that most Pentium systems are built on is the Triton chip set. This chip set does not and will never support the DRAM technology that will be needed for Pentium Pro systems. So here we are in 1995, with the Pentium Pro and its true 32-bit architecture, ready for 200 MHz and beyond but with no way to get there short of assigning this year's purchase to the dumpster in the not-too-distant future.

    Scott Gongwer
    via the Internet

If PC Magazine has one particularly annoying trait, it's the tendency to disregard real-life budgetary concerns when it comes to recommending equipment. For example, in your issue of December 5, 1995, you state that "it no longer makes sense to buy a 486-based PC." But I remember that for at least a year after your magazine had similarly proclaimed the 386-based PCs obsolete, they were still a reasonable choice for the budget-constrained. I know you guys mean well, but could you try to be just a little bit conscious of the less well-heeled out here?

    Bernie Conneely
    Charlestown, Massachusetts

William P. Flanagan's article "...Out like a Lamb?" makes a point I strongly agree with. Where is it written that every PC user has to upgrade to Windows 95? His emphasis on corporations not wanting to upgrade also applies to individual PC users. Having to purchase new hardware and software every year or two is not my idea of having a well-maintained PC. My idea of a well-maintained PC is to upgrade components when they no longer do the job they are supposed to; for example, when the hard disk fails or when more RAM is needed. At a time when we should be cutting costs, does it really make sense to continually upgrade our PC systems every time some new technology comes on the market? I think not, especially when what we already have does the job to our satisfaction.

    Patrick G. Horneker
    Valparaiso, Indiana

Thanks to William P. Flanagan for a timely piece comparing PCs from numerous manufacturers based upon home usage. As a user of a NeXT computer system who could not accept Windows 3.x as a real user interface, Windows 95 seems finally to be something that the whole family can learn to use and enjoy. I was shopping for a PC at the time this article came out, and it helped confirm the choices I made relating to system configuration. Thanks again for a timely, great review that saved me money.

    Harris S. Targovnik
    via the Internet

I think that articles similar to "In like a Lion. . ." and ". . .Out like a Lamb?" (December 5, 1995), which reviewed the top OS/2 systems, would be very helpful. Due to the lack of good support for OS/2 of some hardware vendors, the compatibility of systems--even those preloaded with OS/2--varies greatly. It would be interesting and useful to find out which systems work well and which ones have compatibility problems.

    Robert Simpson
    via PC MagNet

Copyright (c) 1996 Ziff-Davis Publishing Company