operating system upgrade

Topic

New Reply

I am upgrading from Win95, but do not want to go to XP because of uncertainty of the ability of MS to handle the protection issue. What are the pros and cons of going to Win2000 vs Win ME? I am a minimum multi-media and game user, and am mainly looking for stability.

Reply | Quote

Replies

If you have a problem with ME, you’ll get inundated with folk telling you you should have gone to W2K.
If you have a problem with W2K, you should get it resolved.

That’s maybe being a bit simplistic, but it is borne out by what I see being posted on the Lounge.

What sort of applications do you intend running on it?
Are you in a network environment?
Is security an issue?

Reply | Quote

No network, single machine operating in my home, so security is no big deal. I run Office applications with substantial Access applications. Also internet stuff, including VoIP. My main problem has always been stability. I don’t want to continue the hang-ups and crashes.

Reply | Quote

I think the answer has to be W2K then, but you may care to await the views of those who have experienced both for further enlightenment.

Reply | Quote

Being that you are running Win 95 telld me that you have a older machine. You need to list your hardware spec’s, you may need to up grade some of your hardware?

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

I will be getting a big, fast machine, so I don’t expect any hardware limitations.

Reply | Quote

If Leif says W2k, then you must listen. If you get a new box with W2k, then good. Some boxes (Dell) will give you a $US20 upgrade to XP when it is OEM-ready. This is my route.

Reply | Quote

Hi
I run both Win 2kP and XP RC1. Each has its points. If you’re getting a new machine, get XP. The difficult part is you almost always have to get new software, (except e.g. MS Office) not just upgrades as you can extensively utilise with Win 2k. At the moment, I am not able to run a real-time virus protector when in XP.
If I have serious work to do, I boot into 2k. If I want to play around, then it’s XP.
XP has alot more novel features, is (or can be) visually very different and has IE6, OE6 and WMP built in, to name but a few. There are also more things to tweak and twist. A few years down the line and XP will reign supreme on home systems.
Let’s put it this way : 2000 is the Rolls-Royce; XP is the Porsche.

ypymaytyc

Reply | Quote

ypymaytyc???????

Reply | Quote

Hi-
Just thought I would chime in. While I know most IT pros like to bash any of the consumer OSes that come out, I for one like to give them a chance to allow my users some comfort of the familiar OS they use at home. So, I have experience with all the current MS OSes out there now. ME is just not very good. It has some cool features, like system restore, but in my opinion, it is the worst OS since 95. No stability, and that seems to be what you are looking for. If you do not run games, and only use the office suite 2000 is the way to go. I love it, and it rarely crashes (and when it does it is usually my fault). One warning, it does have much more overhead than the other OSes, so I would suggest a large memory upgrade to have a very quick running system. Also be sure to have an adequate CPU. Anyway, kinda wordy, but that is my opinion on the ME vs 2000 question.

Reply | Quote

I also am thinking of moving to Win2K for increased stability.

I have one CPU 450 with 64Mb (presumably need extra RAM here) a second with CPU 500 and 128Mb RAM and I have on order a third CPU 800 with 256Mb RAM. All networked CAT5E UTP. I mostly work with Office 2000 and am not into games (aren’t I sad!)

Are there likely to be any obvious problems here?

I understand that Win2K is fussier over hardware cards than Win98SE (graphic, modem, network). Is this correct?

Reply | Quote

Having recently converted a peer workgroup of a dozen old w95s to newer W2Ks (450 to 800 Mh, 64 to 128 ram), no trouble with cards except old ISA modem and sound cards. If cards are PnP and PCI, then W2k should set them up without further notice.

If you care about security, then by all means set them up under NTFS, take advantage of ‘permissions’ on shared resources. Be alert to preserving Administrator passwords.

You will be pleased with the toughness/security of this operating environment.

Reply | Quote

Win 2k is supposed to be not good for games owing to lack of drivers for some of the later hardware and cards. I should think by now this has mostly been dealt with.
From my limited experience, 2kP and XpRC1 seem to be equally stable, though XP throws up the occasional glitch message (something about a re-entry point and krnl32.dll, which does not appear to be fatal). And I have not been able to get WM Player to download skins…

Lonnie : Yer Pays Yer Money And Yer Takes Yer Choice.

Reply | Quote