wich windows ?

[HansKenens]

Hallo !!

I'm getting sick of Win ME. I've the choice to install win 98 (2th. edition) win 2000 or win XP. So, I need your opinion what is the best, stable operating system ?

Thanks
Hans.

[YODA74]

Go 2000 and XP, It's windows Whats stable, my horse barn is stable http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/cool.gif

------------------
Death has come to our windows.

-- Jeremiah 9:21
(undoubtedly a Biblical reference to a Microsoft product!)

YODA74@windows-sucks.com

[hiredgoonz]

Windows 2000 is a little more stable than XP in my experience...XP has some issues with nVidia drivers and some hardware that may work under 2000 may not work under XP (although the reverse is also true, some stuff that works under XP doesn't under 2000)

I would check your hardware for compatibility, use the HCL on the M$ site.

Make sure you have at least 256mb of ram for XP also, it will work with less, but it tends to slowdown if you multitask with less than 256mb.

I wouldn't even consider 98, except as a dual-boot with 2000 or XP, and even then only if you need support for a piece of hardware or software that won't work under 2000/XP.

If you do go dual-boot, make sure to install 98 first, makes everything much simpler.

Personally, I have upgraded all my systems to XP except for a Pentium 200, so I would have to recommend that. M$ will be supporting XP for the long run and a Service Pack is due out soon that should fix most of the problems...

------------------
When all else fails, read the instructions.

Microsoft Knowledge Base (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;rid;kbinfo)

Drivers (http://www.driverguide.com)

Google (http://www.google.com)

[HansKenens]

Thanks Yoda,
I don't have a horse but I've a cat that is much stable than all the stuff of windows. I'll try win 2000 and when i'm not satisfied mabey I gonna write a letter to Bill. Should he answer to a little Belgium guy ???
Hans.

PS: I (and my little daughter) don't understand the sense: "death comes trough our windows". Has the sense something to do with sep. 11 ?

[HansKenens]

Guys,
I gonna try win 2000 after "Hiredgoonz" and "Yodah" have give me some tips. Now I gonna sleep. In the little country Belgium it's midnight at this moment and tomorrow I've to work (a little bit).

Hans.

[YODA74]

Hired, definatly has some good advise on your windows I would go with 2000 my own self at least for another year until most of the Bugs are gone from XP.
But to answer your question on "Death has come to our windows"

This comes from the Bible::: http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Jer/Jer009.html

Quote:For death is come up into our windows, [and] is entered into our palaces, to cut off the children from without, [and] the young men from the streets.

I'm not a religious man so I could not explain anything in the word.
Basically it is just that someone has taken the word of god (let me refraise that)has taken a Biblical reference and used it for comical purposes to make fun of Brother Bill and windows.

And if it does affend anyone I will remove it all you have to do is say so.

------------------
Death has come to our windows.

-- Jeremiah 9:21
(undoubtedly a Biblical reference to a Microsoft product!)

YODA74@windows-sucks.com



[This message has been edited by YODA74 (edited 03-24-2002).]

[mjc]

Yoda,

I have seen Biblical quotes used to try and justify more nonsense in the name of seriousness....so no problems here!

(I'm pretty sure that if Jeremiah had a computer it would be penguin flavored.......)

------------------
mjc
Links list:Computer Links (http://www.dreamwater.org/tech/mjc/index.htm)

Celts are the men that heaven made mad, For all their battles are merry and their songs are all sad.

[andyswork@beci.net]

Windows 2000 gets my vote. I have yet to crash it.
I can look at 98se and it crashes.
All my hardware and software works in 2K.
I just put xp on so can not tell you much about it. I like it,it also picked up all my drivers, and so far no problems.
I run 98se, 2K, XP, and linux 8.1 on one system without any problems. I will make 2K or XP my main system.

------------------
One day I will be a pro, Thanks Andy

[sea69]

hi,

I would like to point out that while win2k is/was very good- winXP is/will be very good.

win2k is history.

so if you are talking about purchasing a new OS, the choice seems pretty simple to me.

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/eek.gif

andy- let us know- I am interested in your opinion of XP compared to win2k.

as mentioned the service pack is coming soon for winXP- but I'm pretty happy with it the way it is

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif



------------------
sea1_69@hotmail.com

homepage (http://www.seanweb1.homestead.com/index.html)

[RKBA]

I have a Quad boot system. It used to consist of Linux, Win98, Win2K, and WinXp until I tried the so called "Automated System Recovery" of WinXP (for some reason every time I plug or unplugged in a hard drive cartridge in it's "Mobile Rack", WinXp would fail to boot (thought it was on the wrong partition or something).

Anyhow, after very foolishly running the WinXP "Automated System Recovery" it completely TRASHED two of the three hard drives I have on line. I actually had to reformat them. Fortunately, I had backups for most everything on the third on-line hard drive that wasn't trashed, and on the hard drive in the "Mobile Rack" that I normally keep unplugged for safe keeping. Nevertheless, I'll never reinstall WinXP again. I lost about two weeks of work (except for the programs I was in the process of developing which are also stored on a CD-RW disk, Zip disk, and a Sun Workstation at work), but it was a real hassle restoring everything. I wouldn't have lost anything at all, except that I was only planning for a single hard drive failure, not two at once! I still have a Quad boot system, but now it has Linux, Win98, Win2K#1, and Win2K#2. The reason I have two Win2K's is they both are installed with an NTFS file system, and that way I can get to the system files of the other Win2K installation without having to contend with the protection that doesn't even allow Administrator privileges to modify. As long as you access them from the other Win2K OS, there's no problem with modifying anything you want in the other Win2K partition.

-- Ron

------------------
Centerfire (http://home.pacbell.net/rsdotson/) ‘‘The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.’’ -- Thomas Jefferson

[This message has been edited by RKBA (edited 03-26-2002).]

[sea69]

RKBA-

Very sorry to hear this about your loss and know how frustrating that is, but would point out that because you didn't take time to learn how to use it properly it is your fault and not winXP's.

and as MOST people using winXP will not be trying the setup you have described.


I only say this so as not to discourage the everyday user from trying winXP, I have found it much more than adequate and much better than any other M$ OS I have used/installed.


http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
sea1_69@hotmail.com

homepage (http://www.seanweb1.homestead.com/index.html)

[This message has been edited by sea69 (edited 03-26-2002).]

[kayofcircles]

I am leaning toward 2K just "because." Very conflicted on XP. Several here are recommending it, but have recently seen screenshots and (warning: this is petty of me) think the Start button and Taskbar looks cartoonish, and don't like the whole "activation" concept. We've done a lot of upgrading, changing, restoring, or whatever to puters in the last year..having to call M$ every time we do something to reinstall XP would be ludicrous. But, having said that, my understanding is that 2K doesn't do games very well, and so my husband will probably "need" XP..sooner or later. Happy to hear that there is a Service Pack coming out though...think it would some kind of miracle for M$ to release a "bug free" OS.

Yoda I hardly count as a "religious" person, but I am not offended by your Bible quote. I like it!

[iisbob]

Ok, i'm gonna step in here and post my thoughts;[liat] common misconception #1-2000 doesn't do games well; that's not true, i've been using 2k since it's inception-and bar only a very few older games, i've had no problems whatsoever with running them in 2k, Xp causes multi-boot systems to be unstable-i'm running XP, linux,DOS,and 2k on a raid 5 SCSi setup, not only have i had no problems doing hotswaps, but XP has religiously correctly recognized and configured any drives i put in.[/list]

Now this is a corporate machine, used to store important data ( and we do have a simplier 2k only SCSI setup just for insurnace ) and have yet to have any major problems with any of the OS's installed and hardware configuration.

Now, at home, i'm using XP soley on my main gamer-i like it, especially as it combines the proven reliability of NT with the friendly appearance of the home user 98-and Kay after awhile you get used to the " cartoony " look, and i actually prefer it over the classic feel; which you can use instead of the " xp " feel if you choose.

If you're not famaliar with how NT works, i would suggest getting ahold of 2k first, there is plenty of support available for it, and the majority of bugs have been worked out. If you just want to jump in head firsat, then by all means go with XP, it's pretty forgiving from what i've seen of consulting some private individuals and their problems, unlike 98 which could crash at the drop of a hat. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/tongue.gif



------------------
iisbob

The man who sets out to carry a cat by its tail learns something that will always be useful and which never will grow dim or doubtful. -- Mark Twain.

[hiredgoonz]

When I first saw XP, I thought it looked like an OS designed by Fisher Price...

You can turn off the bright colors and new designs, in fact, on systems that are close to the requirements, it will give a noticeable performance boost.

However, if you're looking at purchasing an OS, I agree with sea. XP is the way to go, it is the future. If you want to be sure that your product is up to date and compatible, XP is probably the direction you should go.

As far as activation goes...it is a pain, but it can be defeated. If you don't want to break activation, but still want to install one copy of an OS on multiple machines or just don't want the hassle of having to call M$ if you do lots of hardware changes, then you should go with 2000.

------------------
When all else fails, read the instructions.

Microsoft Knowledge Base (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;rid;kbinfo)

Drivers (http://www.driverguide.com)

Google (http://www.google.com)

[RKBA]

Originally posted by sea69:
... because you didn't take time to learn how to use it properly it is your fault and not winXP's.

And what exactly is there to learn to "use" about "Automated System Recovery" pray tell? I think my only mistake was in naively believing that it would indeed restore itself from the ASR backup I'd saved earlier to a different hard drive, as promised by the ASR restore prompt. Instead, after it had finished corrupting both the hard drive WinXP was installed on as well and the hard drive the ASR backup was stored on, the next thing I saw on the screen was the infamous "Blue Screen of Death" (Yes, WinXP has one too, although the text displayed is in a different font). At least Windows 2000 is smart enough to recognize the different operating systems installed on different hard drives and partitions and allow the user to "choose" which to repair/restore. And by the way, the removable hard drive in the "Mobile Rack" is the slave drive on ATA channel 2, so it always acquires the last drive letter in the chain and doesn't cause any drive letter changes. Win2K operates the same regardless of whether the removable hard drive is plugged in or not. I mean after all, WinXP is nothing more than Windows NT version 5.1 (see HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\CurrentVersion).

If you only have one hard drive and WinXP is your only operating system, then perhaps ASR would have worked as advertised, but it's pretty obvious that Microsoft did minimal testing of WinXP before releasing the product, and as usual is letting the first customers act as its Beta testers. Perhaps after Microsoft has released a couple of major bug fixes (aka; "Service Packs") it may be ready for prime time, but by then Microsoft will undoubtedly be touting it's next latest and greatest OS (presumably Windows NT Version 5.2).

-- Ron


------------------
Centerfire (http://home.pacbell.net/rsdotson/) ‘‘The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.’’ -- Thomas Jefferson

[sea69]

kay- I thought that way too.. even nick named it "Candy Land".. but I can tell you that in reality- win9x appearence is HARDER on the eyes in the long term, I found deffinte eye strain after trying to work on a win9x machine for a day after being used to the winXP scheme.

here's for you kay!

click me for win9x/winxp (http://seanweb1.homestead.com/files/4kay.jpg)

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif



------------------
sea1_69@hotmail.com

homepage (http://www.seanweb1.homestead.com/index.html)

[sea69]

ron,

what you say may be true, but there hasn't been a SP released yet.. how many SP('s) do you have for win2000???

my point was that when you as advanced and knowlegeable as you apparently are post that it is not a good OS, then others see this and come to the same conclusion when it may well be perfect for them.

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif



------------------
sea1_69@hotmail.com

homepage (http://www.seanweb1.homestead.com/index.html)

[kfh]

Hi All,
Yes XP is the way to go, but I'm still getting used to it.
I booted to ME for the first time for a while, and still think ME opens my files quicker.
kfh.


------------------
-------
Sequitur Patrem Non Passibus Aequis

[YODA74]

I don't know, i hate window BUT the more I look at Sea's screen shots I believe I'm going to Purchase XP I will learn to live with any flaws "I have lived with Me, So I can live thru just about anything" Another nice screen shot there sea, I think i would just do one thing though, Get rid of the LOG OFF Button I got rid of mine in start up, I hit it accidently one day Man what an Idiot I felt like, http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
Death has come to our windows.

-- Jeremiah 9:21
(undoubtedly a Biblical reference to a Microsoft product!)

YODA74@windows-sucks.com

[rond36]

I feel Win XP is your best option. If you have the disk space keep Win ME for the older programs although Win XP is getting better at supporting older programs. I have programs that I tried to install in XP in November and they wouldn't install but now they install and run just fine even better than they do in ME. Can't wait for the SP to come out http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
I think Windows XP and Microsoft use more of my bandwidth than I do!
WindowsBBS.com (http://www.WindowsBBS.com/index.php?referrerid=115) Is back online, check it out

[sea69]

YODA-

I never really paid any attention to the log off button until you pointed it out.

when I click it nothing happens because I'm admin and the only user, guest account disabled.


rond36
- I agree

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
sea1_69@hotmail.com

homepage (http://www.seanweb1.homestead.com/index.html)

[This message has been edited by sea69 (edited 03-26-2002).]

[sea69]

RKBA-


in Services, do you have the following two:

Logical Disk Manager = automatic

Detects and monitors new hard disk drives and sends disk volume information to Logical Disk Manager Administrative Service for configuration. If this service is stopped, dynamic disk status and configuration information may become out of date. If this service is disabled, any services that explicitly depend on it will fail to start.


Logical Disk Manager Administrative Service = manual

Configures hard disk drives and volumes. The service only runs for configuration processes and then stops.

was wondering if this could be the source of the problem that you had.

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/eek.gif




------------------
sea1_69@hotmail.com

homepage (http://www.seanweb1.homestead.com/index.html)

[EpoxEd]

Allow me to toss in a vote? I think it is prudent to hold off on XP for the reasons mentioned regarding issues ("bugs") in hardware support, not to mention software. (I bought XP last Fall, and have only played with last summer's RC1) I will keep it on the shelf for a while. However, my son, who is a pro (unlike me, a hobbyist) is enthusiastic about XP.

Whatever you do, DO NOT get an "upgrade" to install over an existing Windows! Stick with an OEM version. My experience with Me could fill a book (or two).
The Me OEM versions run well, and the Restore function is a godsend. Win2K does not have Restore because (among other things) it came out before Me. The self-fixing routines in Win2K can bite you, as happened to me due to a random hardware failure, but is better than Win9x(pre-Me). Now comes ASR and a short version of Go-Back. The trend at Microsoft is towards auto/self repair... a noble quest, but frought with peril at times.

On the subject of stability... have you seen the list of "fixes" in Win2K SP1 and SP2? Both are a mile long. And SP3 is in Beta, to be released shortly. Just remember, an upgrade means introducing new bugs into a system that you have already eliminated most (with a lot of toil and sweat). Food for thought, eh? http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
Senior citizen's toy
AMD1.4/RAID/Win2Kpro

[iisbob]

i would'nt hold my breath on service pack 3 for 2k, word is that since the development of Xp's service pack, that anything for 2k has been put on hold.

Except for 2000 server, MS has announced ( to the business world primarily ) that XP is to replace NT/2k prof as the " supported " OS, and that XP server edition is on it's way ( longhorn? perhaps ).

For the money, i would say once again to stick with either 2000 or XP; either way you're getting the best of microsoft to date.

The catch with XP is that if you go with it, you'll recieve more upfront support from MS than on any of their older operating systems.





------------------
iisbob

The man who sets out to carry a cat by its tail learns something that will always be useful and which never will grow dim or doubtful. -- Mark Twain.

[RKBA]

sea69, et. al.,

I didn't necessarily mean to imply that WinXP isn't a "good" OS, I just wanted to warn everyone of the potential perils of using WinXP's so called "Automated System Recovery."

As for the Disk Management services, I don't recall how they were set up in WinXP but I don't believe I ever changed them from their defaults (as I said before, WinXP is no longer installed on my machine). In Win2000 however, they're configured exactly the way you show them (ie; Logical Disk Manager "Watchdog Service" is started and on automatic, and Logical Disk Manager Administrative Service is stopped and set to manual. It works just fine that way whether I plug in my "Mobile" hard drive or not.

Frankly though, I really don't understand what all the hoopla is about. After all, there was WinNT 3.51, WinNT 4.0 (with SP's 1-6 IIRC), WinNT 5.0 (aka; Win2000, with SP's 1 & 2 so far), and now WinNT 5.1 (aka; WinXP, with no SP's out yet). Win95/98/ME aside, it seems to me that every time a version of Windows becomes stable and most of the bugs have been fixed, Microsoft releases a new version with a few new features and consequently new bugs. The irritating thing in my opinion is that with each new release they seem to move the standard system tools around to new locations in a random rather than systematic fashion. I don't know whether that's to give the impression of newness or is actually an attempt to make things easier to use. Also, they incorporate more second party programs into each new release, presumably to capture more market share. I only played around with WinXP for a while to check it out since I get all the Microsoft software free as part of my MSDN Enterprise subscription, but from what I could see, aside from the new "eye candy" the only differences between Win2K and WinXP are the inclusion of built-in CD-RW/ROM burner software, Media Player 7, and a second rate firewall. Sea69 - I noticed ZoneAlarm in the system tray of your version of WinXP. Don't you trust WinXP's built-in firewall? http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif

Overall in the long run, improvement of the product is a good thing (I doubt that anyone would want to go back to WinNT 3.51 for example), but as EpoxEd said, with each new step forward there are new bumps in the road to be smoothed out. Whenever WinXP has a Service Pack or two under its belt, perhaps I'll give it another try. If what hiredgoonz said is true however, that a Service Pack for WinXP is due out soon, it's kind of scary because it took - what(?) about a year before a SP was ever released for Win2K. If there have been enough verified bugs reported to warrant a SP release for WinXP already, it makes me very leery of "upgrading" to it just yet.

My MAJOR objection to WinNT 5.1 however is the "Activation" feature, that others have already mentioned. For that reason alone I wouldn't make it my primary OS, and not just because it's going to make lots more money for Billy since it's no longer possible to install on multiple machines (unless you happen to be the owner of a corporate copy, or a pirate "hacked" copy with the activation feature disabled). Visualize this: You're pulling an all-nighter or maybe working over the weekend to meet a project deadline. WinXP crashes and you have to reinstall it, or maybe you add a hard drive of something and WinXP refuses to reinstall because you've used up your two "free" activations. "If" you manage to get M/S on the telephone but your begging, pleading, and groveling doesn't convince them to give you a new activation code, you have to run down to the nearest software store and buy a brand new copy to the tune of $200-$300 dollars. By the time you've done all this and reinstalled WinXP, you've already missed your deadline. WinXP is already buggy enough without introducing intentional problems into it!

Having said all that, there is one positive thing I CAN say about WinNT 5.1. It seems to boot up faster than WinNT 5.0, and I like that a lot. Would I pay $200-$300 dollars for it? Of course not.

WinXP will become the predominant OS simply because that's what the computer manufacturers are installing on their new machines, but what I'd like to know is what features it has that would compel anyone to actually buy a copy of it outright (assuming you already have Win2000 on your machine).

-- Ron


P.S.

Just noticed iisbob's post which said: "The catch with XP is that if you go with it, you'll recieve more upfront support from MS than on any of their older operating systems."

Since when has anyone received any support from Microsoft about anything (without paying for it)? http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif

[This message has been edited by RKBA (edited 03-27-2002).]

[iisbob]

Since when has anyone received any support from Microsoft about anything (without paying for it)?

Ever seen the knowledge base MS keeps online?!


It's not just there for looks!

And yes, even us IT pro's use it quite a lot, matter of fact whenever we have a problem ( or if you called MS ) that's the first thing they would ask/suggest! " Have you looked into our knowledge base? "

Also you have to remember that MS's primary business is to make money-so in the corporate world you have access to resources that a normal home user won't.

By the way, XP's media player is no# 8, and sysgate was the designer of the built in firewall-and for just casual use, it's perfectly adequate. Don't forget the remote feature also, that was previously only avaiable in the 2k server edition.

I still remember the day NT came out, and to this day i think MS made a mistake in modeling 95 after it and then subsquently releasing " fixes " to improve their image.

As for every version of Window's getting more bloated, that's the name of the game-in order for them to get more public appeal they've had to incorperate more user features which ='s more sales.

Bill's in it for the money, not for our approval. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif



------------------
iisbob

The man who sets out to carry a cat by its tail learns something that will always be useful and which never will grow dim or doubtful. -- Mark Twain.

[sea69]

Sea69 - I noticed ZoneAlarm in the system tray of your version of WinXP. Don't you trust WinXP's built-in firewall?
>>>

The firewall in winXP is only good for incoming, not outgoing that's why I have ZA. Thought about Norton Iternet Securities 2002 but don't like how it Norton takes over the whole system.

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif



------------------
sea1_69@hotmail.com

homepage (http://www.seanweb1.homestead.com/index.html)

[kayofcircles]

Want to see an old lady go tharn?? Give her an equal number of "pros" and "cons"...and then say, "Okay, choose!" Sigh.
Nice screenshot, Sea ..thanks.
iisbob : Thanks for the clarification on games and 2K.
And, RKBA , your paragraph on reinstalling XP was exactly what I was trying to say above...except that, in our case, it's about the "mix and match" kind of puter play that we do on older puters both for the "learning experience" and for upgrading friends' puters. Recently a friend brought his "broke" puter over. My husband swapped mobos with friend and coaxed both hard drives into working with different mobos..without having to wipe/reformat the hard drives. That way, we have the malfunctioning one and can work on it at leisure, and our friend's puter is working fine. Don't think we would have been able to do that with XP...probably a wee bit of miracle could coax 98 into doing it.

[RKBA]

Originally posted by iisbob:
Ever seen the knowledge base MS keeps online?!

And yes, even us IT pro's use it quite a lot, matter of fact whenever we have a problem ( or if you called MS ) that's the first thing they would ask/suggest! " Have you looked into our knowledge base? "
Bill's in it for the money, not for our approval. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif


Yes, I use the knowledge base quite often, and you'll find there's a lot more info in it about older products than there is about newer ones, simply because they've had more time to debug and fix problems! http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif

I've only called M/S support twice, and that's only because I get 10 "free" trouble calls per year as part of my MSDN subscription.

Of course Bill's in it for the money, but he needs overall approval from the general public in order to sell more product - although I have to admit there isn't much alternative these days except for Apple (Ugh!) and Linux (which still isn't ready for the casual user unfortunately, but it's getting there. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif)

-- Ron


------------------
Centerfire (http://home.pacbell.net/rsdotson/) ‘‘The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.’’ -- Thomas Jefferson

[iisbob]

...simply because they've had more time to debug and fix problems!...

Now i wouldn't give them that much credit!! LOL! http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/tongue.gif



------------------
iisbob

The man who sets out to carry a cat by its tail learns something that will always be useful and which never will grow dim or doubtful. -- Mark Twain.

[HansKenens]

Whauw !!
What a lot of information ! http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif
But, now I have a problem. There are pro and contra for WinXP and also for Win2000 and it is difficult to decide for me. Mebay i install both OS to check out wich is the best for me.
Anaway guys, thanks a lot !!!

Hans. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif