Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Upgrade from Windows 98SE to XP Pro

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Upgrade from Windows 98SE to XP Pro

 
 
Randall Ainsworth
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2003
I have no agenda. I'm just 100 miles from Microsoft's HQ so Bill is
probably breathing down my neck as I write this. I don't give a ****
about Microsoft. I'm just speaking from real world experience.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Randall Ainsworth
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
I never said that 98 was more stable than XP. But if I had to choose
between the two, it would be 98SE all the way. Fortunately I don't
have to choose.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tom Scales
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
No, they won't. Perhaps the problem is the lack of skills of the technicians
maintaining your environment, because XP IS more stable the Windows 2000.
Period.

Either can be unstable when not properly managed.

Tom
"Randall Ainsworth" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:110720031627483773%(E-Mail Removed)...
> No brain dump special here.
>
> Look, I've seen this almost every single day for the past two years.
> XP is sluggish besides being ugly. It's a resource hog and less stable
> than 2K. Anybody in the computer biz will tell you that. Stop reading
> PC Mag.




 
Reply With Quote
 
Rick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
"Tom Scales" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:FKJPa.4147$(E-Mail Removed)2.webusenet.com.. .
> No, they won't. Perhaps the problem is the lack of skills of the technicians
> maintaining your environment, because XP IS more stable the Windows 2000.
> Period.


Well, not quite "period". E.g. try running more than one USB
scanner under XP and see what happens:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;324756

> Either can be unstable when not properly managed.


Very true. But there are more stability problems with XP right
now simply because it's a newer product. Microsoft is up to
SP4 on Win2K and virtually all major stability (and other) issues
have been addressed. Not so with XP. But Randall's claim
that Win98 is preferable for digital editing to either XP or 2K
is absolutely ridiculous.

RickW


 
Reply With Quote
 
Abrasha
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
Randall Ainsworth wrote:
>
> I have no agenda. I'm just 100 miles from Microsoft's HQ so Bill is
> probably breathing down my neck as I write this. I don't give a ****
> about Microsoft. I'm just speaking from real world experience.


So which two keys is it, Mr. Blowhard?

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Vaughn Buck
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003

"Randall Ainsworth" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:110720031626299023%(E-Mail Removed)...
> > 9 out of 10 people I've heard comment on win2k and XP, who have used
> > both, say XP is more stable. Your experience is abnormal.

>
> I've only worked with XP every day since before it was released to the
> general public.


Have installed the service packs? I stayed away from XP but have used it on
my last two machines. Its been flawless. First machine had an issue but it
was a bad sector on the hard disk. Reinstalled with the old version still on
(so no accidental usage bad sector, yes I know it was marked after being
found but just in case). On my other sons machine, had used Win98se for a
long time and upgraded MB and planned to use Win98 again but it just would
work with his usb wireless nic. Upgraded to XP with no issue. Both xp
upgrades were clean versions not upgrades. I used Win2k for a couple of
years before but am convinced that M$ has it right with XP. Their machines
are used for gaming and worked hard.

Can a machine be made to lock up? sure. Especially if you try to stay with
old outdated drivers. Also if you're not careful and let M$ use its
versions instead of the manufacturer's that can cause problems.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Vaughn Buck
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003

"Rick" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:benqvu$77qbf$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de...
>. Microsoft is up to
> SP4 on Win2K and virtually all major stability (and other) issues
> have been addressed. Not so with XP. But Randall's claim
> that Win98 is preferable for digital editing to either XP or 2K
> is absolutely ridiculous.


Yes but XP is not new its NT X where as Win2k was NT X- Yes they do add
new interfaces but that's fluff. And some code is changed but its far from a
totally new OS. With SP1 its running very well which says a lot. Win2k is a
fine OS also but can go crazy. The machine I'm writing this from was on
Win2k for 2 years with no issue and now Win2k won't even load. I'm back to
Win98SE. Go figure.


 
Reply With Quote
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
In message <FKJPa.4147$(E-Mail Removed)2.webusenet.com>,
"Tom Scales" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>No, they won't. Perhaps the problem is the lack of skills of the technicians
>maintaining your environment, because XP IS more stable the Windows 2000.
>Period.
>
>Either can be unstable when not properly managed.


Or with a poorly supported peripheral. It's very easy to get a
distorted view of an operating system, when you work with 100 copies of
the same computer, which all have the same video or sound card that has
a bad driver, reproduced 100x in a house of mirrors. "We have 100
computers here running XP, and they all crash once a day!"
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
Reply With Quote
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
In message <110720031626299023%(E-Mail Removed)>,
Randall Ainsworth <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> 9 out of 10 people I've heard comment on win2k and XP, who have used
>> both, say XP is more stable. Your experience is abnormal.


>I've only worked with XP every day since before it was released to the
>general public.


With an attitude the whole time? With the same computer(s)?
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
Reply With Quote
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
In message <110720031628477327%(E-Mail Removed)>,
Randall Ainsworth <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I have no agenda. I'm just 100 miles from Microsoft's HQ so Bill is
>probably breathing down my neck as I write this. I don't give a ****
>about Microsoft. I'm just speaking from real world experience.


Perhaps you're filtering out what you want from a small slice of real
world experience.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Upgrade from Windows 98SE to XP Pro Bart van der Wolf Digital Photography 0 07-11-2003 09:31 AM
Re: Upgrade from Windows 98SE to XP Pro John O. Digital Photography 0 07-11-2003 06:37 AM
Re: Upgrade from Windows 98SE to XP Pro Matt Digital Photography 2 07-11-2003 05:12 AM
Re: Upgrade from Windows 98SE to XP Pro ajacobs2 Digital Photography 0 07-11-2003 01:38 AM
Re: Upgrade from Windows 98SE to XP Pro Dragan Cvetkovic Digital Photography 0 07-11-2003 01:05 AM



Advertisments