bumcrack

I'm using 98 at the moment, thinking of changing to XP.
Is it any better?
Is there problems with drivers and games?
Any views from people who have upgraded?

DazV

Don't upgrade - do a clean install. Lots of scary stories about people who upgraded, opposed to those like me who did a clean installation (eg. reformatting hard disk etc)

Check first to see if all your hardware and add-on cards (perhaps modems, etc) have XP drivers available for them.

Some games have problems running in XP too.

I run it without any problems and would recommend it. It does need a fair bit of horsepower under the hood. 256mb of ram is good, but it likes 512MB better.

shunty

If I remember correctly, XP won't upgrade from 9x or ME, sure I tried it when it first came out, from ME & it prompted me for a NT4 or Win2K cd (which I had), just wouldn't accept the ME cd..
anyone else had this issue?

As for XP, how old is your pc, & what spec is it ?
Are all you pci & IDE/SCUSI components branded type ones, if so you will be ok, if not beware for driver support...although I think it is better than the earlier days when it first came out.
If you have a decent internet connection from your pc you can use the hardware compatability wizard checker_upperer.

Also you are much better off flattening your current OS & installing from fresh, then you don't inherit all the previous isuses/problems etc, nice clean build.

shunty

LeeMac

iTrader: (1)

Hoenstly I would install Win Me cos its faultless (well i know of a version that is bad, but recent versions no prob), ive used it for ages now with games but must say Im no game freak and its been excellent and if you get any probs you can restore to an earlier time or date, 9/10 for me. Just give it a go

DazV

I've used WinME at work since it came out and all those pc's are flaky - not trustworthy at all.

Sorry to disagree Lee, I'd say avoid WinME

chiark

Win2k. Seems marvellous.

rik1471

If you have a decent spec'd machine i'd definately go for XP. I'm a Computer technician and have had experience with all Microsoft Operating Systems. XP is definately the most stable version i've encountered.

2000 is good. (XP is basically 2000 with a load more features)

Dizzy

win2k.

messed with the rest... stick with the best

Since the first beta's I've stuck with win2k. XP *shivers* is hatefull I hate the OS, but not as much as office XP [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]

MarkO

XP is fine, unless you're overclocking and using ultra cutting edge hardware for which there are no certified drivers. Since the kernal for XP and W2K are almost identical, if you can run the latter, you'll almost always be okay with the former.

As for the people who said ME is faultless, you clearly haven't ever used a PC in anger. ME is the biggest sack of steaming ****e I've ever used - an OS which gives the appearance of being stable, but is inherently flaky. I'd rather had W95 - at least it didn't try to pretend it was a proper OS.

Oh, and ME can easily be upgraded to XP, without any problems, in my experience.

alistair

ME is a pile of poo !

I bought an 'upgrade' to XP pro, but I'd heard the horror stories so just did a fresh install and it's fantastic - I never thought I could be enthusiastic about an operating system....

In my haste to install XP I did forget a couple of basic bits though - like backing up my contacts in Outlook !

Ken E

If you're not having any problems with W98 and are running some software that is a couple of years old then you might as well stick with W98.

As someone else mentioned, you don't want to upgrade to XP with less than 256mb of memory, and there may also be issues with your hardware and drivers.

Ken

shunty

Mark O - I remember now it was Win2K upgrade that wasn't supported.
My mistake guys

shunty

[Edited by shunty - 5/15/2002 9:30:47 AM]

MarkO

Yes. My laptop was originally supplied with ME, but the day I recieved it I went straight to XP. Because it's a laptop, and my copy of XP was a beta, I wasn't sure how well it would detect the hardware, so I upgraded (it was less hassle, too). Everything went smoothly, and worked perfectly.

About 3 months later I replace the HDD in the laptop, so did a clean install, and that worked perfectly too. So I've tried both ways successfully.

Think about it though, MS is trying to move everyone off the crappy 98/ME driver model and onto the more stable and better-structured NT/XP kernel/driver model. If there was no upgrade path from ME to XP, they wouldn't get very far, now would they?

Who told you that ME couldn't be upgraded to XP anyway?

MarkO

Now you've changed your post, mine makes no sense.

Anyway, I'm fairly certain that W2K can also be upgraded to XP too, which would make sense for the reasons I mentioned above. I've not tried it though, I'll admit.

shunty

Mark O - I edited my last post out as I got me OS's muddled up....
first time for everything, as I have never made a mistake before EVER

shunty

Daz34

I've used Win 98, Win98SE, Win Me and now use XP Pro. Win Me was definately the most unstable whilst I can't praise XP highly enough. It is rock solid and looks great. You can play old games & software on it as well if you run them in 'compatibility mode'. Would definately reformat first though. Upgrades are messy.

Mikey_Boy

erm....

win_ME should be avoided like the plague
go with win2K it's the most stable i have found!
just bare in mind that a lot of older stuff wont run on 2K or XP

jfrf

Stick with win 98.
I upgraded to 2k
You wont notice any difference.Its all a waste of time and money.
If anything I now have new problems with 2k than 98.

MarkO

What problems have you had?

I presume not reliability - unless you've got really hooky kit, I'd be surprised to find W2K less stable than 98. I ran it on my last laptop for 2 years, and the one before that for 18 months too, and didn't ever have any problems to speak of.

If you're finding problems with game compatibility, then yes, that doesn't surprise me - but W2K never was a gaming OS, and many older games are optimised for W98. If you want the stability of the NT kernel, but with the compatibility and games support of 98, then XP's your best bet...

father_jack

Can anyone point me to an article on the differences between XP home and Pro?

Thanks

FJ

DazV

So to sum it up, I think the opinion of those 'in the know' eg. people who use it for a living like me and the rest of the tech guys on here, all resoundingly say ditch WinME!

Win98 SE - not that stable, needs 64MB RAM*
Win2k Pro - very stable, needs 128MB RAM*
WinXP Pro - very stable, needs 256MB RAM*

*My recommendation, not Microsoft's!

MarkO

Here you go:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...y/choosing.asp

Oh, and I run XP Pro on a laptop with 128Mb quite happily. I develop using VS.Net and I also play UnrealTournament on it under XP.

256Mb will make it a bit faster, but it's not vital.

[Edited by MarkO - 5/15/2002 12:23:25 PM]

father_jack

Yeah - just found it meself - I shouldn't be so bloody lazy

Looks like Pro is the one then.

Now where is the cheapest place to buy it online?
Software must be cheaper from the States, It'll install an American version anyway.....

MarkO

You're going to buy it?

jfrf

I must admit that my win 2k problems arise from gaming.
Half life/ Countersrike seems to just freeze up and computer needs reboooting.
This has happened 20 odd times in 3 months. Never had it with 98

Upgrading from any operating sytem is a major pain and for the gains probaly not worth it.
Stick with 98 imho

MarkO

There's your problem then. W2K never was much good for gaming. If you want to play games set up a dual-boot and boot into 98 for games, and use W2k the rest of the time, or just stick with 98 if you're primarily a games player. Either that or see the XBox vs PS2 thread.

XP is significantly better for games, but most 3D games will still run faster under 98, simply because it's a lightweight OS. I prefer XP, but that's 'cos I don't play games that much...

Jeff Wiltshire

All this makes more sense when you remember that

W2K = NT5.0
XP = NT5.1

I still do not understand why Microsoft couldn't stick with the NT name.....

Jeff
(NT3.1 Beta Tester !!!!!)

MarkO

Makes perfect sense if you consider that XP's improvements lie in the time-slice scheduling system (meaning that games running under XP can take more of the CPU than they could under 2K) and the driver model (meaning that drivers can get closer to the HAL than they could in 2K, allowing more efficient use of system resources).

They changed the name because home and small-business users would have been scared away if they'd released XP as NT5.

Mark
(who ran 2K betas for 18 months, and XP betas for more than a year )


[Edited by MarkO - 5/15/2002 1:01:54 PM]

shunty

Mark O - you geek

shunty

shunty

I bet your CV reads:

Top Gamer...... oh & a bit of VB as well

shunty