[LtWorf]

Besides the boot (which windows 3 didn't even do so I don't see why we are comparing it), from clicking on the start menu the 1st time after boot, to the start menu actually appearing on screen it would take 1-2 minutes to populate on windows 95, while on windows 3 on the same machine there would be no such issue.

[hollandheese]

Were you running a 386-16 MHz with 4 MB of memory? And you had hundreds of apps listed on the start menu? Because on anything faster it would absolutely not take that long.

It wasn't always instant on boot on my 486-SLC 33 MHz with 8 MB of memory but at most several to ten seconds for it to appear on first boot after clicking.

And on the Pentium MMX that I'm running now it's always instant on Windows 98 SE.

[M95D]

This is not true. Win95 start menu appears instantly. I dare you to prove me wrong.

You are probably thinking of Win98 menu where they added IE.

[LtWorf]

I am thinking of windows 95 with a computer from 1995, in the year 1995. If you use it on a vm today… yeah thanks for not proving anything.

[M95D]

I'm not using a vm. I have an early 2000s computer running several old OSs. In Win98 I replaced the shell with the one from Win95 because it's faster. See 98lite: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_remastering#98lite

[LtWorf]

I am not a great mathematical genius but I suspect that "early 2000s" came several years after 1995. Correct?

[M95D]

I'm sorry I don't have a museum at home to provide relevant demonstrations to random internet persons or bots.

Win95 start menu opens instantly on any computer that can run it. You either belive me or not.

[LtWorf]

Ah, I am a bot because I remember how using windows 95 in 1995 was?

Ok man, sure. Go play with chatgpt and it will always tell you how right you are :)