I have had a long debate with my bro on which OS is more stable and has the best performance. I tend to like Win 98SE. He says Win 2000 is the best. I have been using Win ME-I know, but I have never had any problems.

What do you guys use/like?

Hey Buzz,

this thread should be posted in "New Technologies" ...

Tom - you want to move it over?

Ahhh that's better. Right forum, now I can answer... (snicker)

Anyway, the 85.00 dollar an hour techs that I talk to say that for the overall big picture of use and functionality, Windows 98 SE is still your best bet. Other operating systems can work better for this or that application but 98 SE still covers more of the basses. So I am being told by more than one professional source. Myself, I have not used anything other than 98 SE because no one is telling me yet that that another OS is going to be overall better for me. I wish something were...

Hi guys,

I had Win98 1st edition on an older computer. I upgraded to this from Win95. :eek:

This OS was very unpredictable. I had alot of problems with system crashes. Very frustrating. I am sure this is why Microsoft released the second edition. I never upgraded and lived with it until we decided to get a new computer. New computer came with XP home edition. I am very satisfied with this OS. Excellent stability so far.

Can't vouch for Win98se. I'm sure it was a big improvement over the 1st edition but I will say this, XP's not bad.

Tom,

You are an avid follower of the ScreenSavers program so you may already know this, but here is a link that may help you.

http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm

He explains what all those services do and how to configure them safely. I found this information very helpful. In fact, I printed the whole thing out for quick reference.

You are right, there's alot of things happening with XP and alot of unnecessary applications running behind the scenes. Anyway, just thought I would share that with you.

Take care.

A lot has to do with how you use your computer, simple surfing/word docs/excel... or graphics/animation/page development... or networking/multi-tasking...

98SE buys you more functionality and some networking capabilities, 2000 and XP are NT based packages that greatly enhance networking and auto install capabilities, early ME was plagued with bugs and most people passed right over it. Upgrading from 98 will have it's own set of hurdles for you due to the different function layout. It takes some getting use to after finding where stuff is that you already knew in 98.

Personally I went from 3.1-98-98SE and now use 2000 professional. I have three systems all networked and only their processor determines what I use them for. The MAC Daddy for web development and graphics work, the 900 for everyday kind of stuff and the laptop for carrying into the den or bedroom.

Hi Ward,

Funny you should mention 3.1. I learned computing using that OS. IMO the jump from 3.1 to Win95 was quite dramatic. It was like going from Earth to Mars. Everything I knew how to do in 3.1, Win95 changed it. File Manager to Explorer. Directories to folders. You get my drift.

Migrating to XP from Win98 was a breeze in comparison.

Take care

Tom - you're the grand-daddy of the BB's!! :D

Buzz - sorry for being a bit anal about getting your thread shifted - I just want to make sure that every forum on the site "has a life" and it doesn't just become one big conglomerated Vintage forum again - the WHOLE site is for vintage (and a few other activities) now. :)

98SE/ME vs 2000/XP?

ME is the final version of the Win95 kernal based OS's ... it was released shortly after MS released the SE version of 98. Without the SE version I would say without doubt that ME beats the pants off Win98.

But when 98SE came out many people went with that and were able to forgo ME altogether (I did). SE fixed many of 98's inherent instabilities, and added some new functionality (internet connection sharing, remote access etc).

You can't really make the comparison between the 95 kernal based OS's and the NT based OS's (NT4, 2000, XP). You're comparing different levels of complexity designed for different users. Having said that, I think with the 95 kernal now phased out, XP has crossed over a long way into the home-user market.

NT kernal based systems are more stable than 95 kernal systems, period.

They have to be as they were designed for business uses (servers, workstations etc).

I finally made the upgrade from 98SE to XP, and yes, there are many new things to learn, and for sure there is a lot of clutter that we could easily do without, but XP is rock solid, looks and feels nice, and is the way forward ... if you don't believe me, Bill has said so! :D

Yep I'm also running WinXp Pro and I really like it. I have used 98SE and Win ME and I must say I prefer XP more. If XP wasn't available I would stick with the 98SE version of Windows as it does seem to be the most stable. I only used ME for about a month because I hated it!!


Mike

I run W98SE in english (a rare commodity here in chile), it's stable, works fine for the Athlon 900. I might try W2000 pro, as we have a network at home, and that machine is the server.

On my free P120 machine (it was a 75, but a friend traded the old processor for a P100 (and a jumpswitch did the trick :D) I am currently running w95b. I plan to make the transition to Linux on that machine, just to experiment with an operating system that every tech geek seems to like. ;)


Chris

Chris,

Keep us informed of your progress with Linux.

I for one, am very interested.

Also check out:

http://www.lindows.com/

I use ME works great for me no problems, I won't change till I have too, if it ain't broke don't fix it. I also use it because I am an avid gamer and 98/ME are still the most compatible and they run best under 98/ME.