Posted 09 December 2010 - 12:33 AM
Posted 09 December 2010 - 12:46 AM
Posted 09 December 2010 - 07:49 AM
Keith
Windows ME (spare computer)
Windows XP 2002 Professional SP3 (desktop computer)
Windows 7 Professional SP1 32bit (laptop computer)
Windows 8 64bit spare drive for laptop computer
Posted 09 December 2010 - 08:55 AM
Posted 09 December 2010 - 09:10 AM
Posted 09 December 2010 - 09:17 AM
Posted 09 December 2010 - 09:47 AM
I still get the general vibe that 2k is "better" than XP though. a pity MS has long since stopped supporting anything earlier than (yuck!) vista.
"change for the sake of change".
Posted 09 December 2010 - 09:56 AM
Posted 09 December 2010 - 10:02 AM
Why are we discussing Win98 vs XP anyway?
Posted 09 December 2010 - 04:15 PM
Well in the 9 years that I used Win98SE I never had it crash once. I used to do a format anf rebuild every 9 months that wasn't because I had to but probably developed a niggling fault I couldn't over come plus everything starts of clean again.On a capable machine, XP is also far less prone to crashes and as cryptodan pointed out is far more secure.
Keith
Windows ME (spare computer)
Windows XP 2002 Professional SP3 (desktop computer)
Windows 7 Professional SP1 32bit (laptop computer)
Windows 8 64bit spare drive for laptop computer
Posted 10 December 2010 - 09:18 AM
Although with the internal version number of 7 being "6.1" to vista's "6.0", we wonder just how much is really different; with vista, and then again with 7, I remember some MS guy implying they were starting over to make a better product. vista, on the other hand, to my knowledge is still full of older windows leftovers, and 7... well, as you said, it's like vista with one hell of a service pack.I still get the general vibe that 2k is "better" than XP though. a pity MS has long since stopped supporting anything earlier than (yuck!) vista.
I was a very late adopter of XP. Ran 2k till the wheels fell off. And was finally seduced
by the eye candy
not available on 2k or earlier.
MS will continue to support XP w\SP3 until 2014 I believe.
Vista has been pretty much compared to ME. Basically a failure. Despite the time it took to release it, it was still rushed to market. Win7 is what Vista was supposed to be. Basically Win7 = Vista with SP XX.
"change for the sake of change".
It was not change for the sake of change. It was change for the sake of the $$$$. If a company fails to create\release new product(s) they cease to make money. If the cease to make an income they close the doors, shudder the windows and disappear into history.
MS has no intentions of going away.
Posted 10 December 2010 - 11:23 AM
Well to me its horses for courses. Win98 maybe 12 years old but its still a good system.......
The other problem with WinXP is it has that much running in the background which you can't see and each app is using system resources (memory) which aren't always necessary........
The thing is if it isn't broke then don't mend it.
Edited by presario, 10 December 2010 - 11:25 AM.
Posted 13 December 2010 - 05:43 PM
Posted 13 December 2010 - 07:23 PM
Posted 14 December 2010 - 09:51 AM
Thats what I hate about the newer Windows system. There are supposed to improve on things not make them worse. I mean the beauty of Windows is that commands and function should be interchangeable but they are left out on Vista and Win7. After WinXP they removed the option to add different button to the Windows Explorer menubar icons, copy, cut, paste, properties etc. Now you have to use the common short-cuts Ctrl+X, Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V and Alt+Enter.I cuss every new version of Windows when they come out. Nothing is where it used to be and things dont work the same.
Im getting old and dont like change much anymore
Keith
Windows ME (spare computer)
Windows XP 2002 Professional SP3 (desktop computer)
Windows 7 Professional SP1 32bit (laptop computer)
Windows 8 64bit spare drive for laptop computer
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users