Just getting ready to install a new hard drive here on personal computer and wondering what everyone thinks would be best to use for operating system, currently using Windows98 .

<MOD EDIT>
Subject Changed To Allow Clearer Identification

Well i currently use Windows 2000 Advanced Server on my workstation at home, simply because i wanted to look posh :)

WIN 98 SE IS THE BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just to be fair you should have posed that as an answer, but between all of those Win98SE

Running two OS's on two cpu's

Apple OSX
Apple 9.0.1

Very happy with both :cool:

It really depends what you are going to do with your computer. Many people run Win2k who should NOT. I do consulting and for someone for someone running 2k and not know ipconfig, they shouldn't be running it. If you are going to just do average computer work, word processing, gaming, browsing, then Win2k is NOT for you. Go with something like Win98SE. I tried Win2k and loved it much since it has great memory management but I found Win98SE much better for what I do. Also, I would advise going against WinME for now since it's pure crap. Next on my list is WinXP which should blow everything away.

Also, if you are going to run a version of Win9x, try not to have more than 128mb of ram since it will be basically useless.

im running Win2k Advanced Server... and also dual booting with WinMe

i'd just like to say, WinMe is the worst "new version" of windows i've experienced with in my life... i mean, whats so new about it?? here's whats new:

- Windows Media Player (v7 i think)
- new white Windows Me splash

MS listed out all these new features but these were features i wouldn't notice much...

Win2k has been a dream, nice and smoooooooth, very nice memory and system resource management... Win2k actually reduces the amount of system resources being used when you close applications instead of mounting them :agree:

Windows 2000 Pro, much better that any other Windows product.

I don't see any reason why anyone should run anything less than Win2000. It has a great memory and resource management. You won't get the blue screen or explorer won't crash every 5 minutes so have to reboot. Also much faster and much better at multitasking. Let's not forget the lovely network update without reboot :dgrin:

I use Win 98 and Linux (dual boot mode) on both my PC's ...

Isn't Win 2000 a bit more resource hungry?

i even like being able to remove hardware and add it again without a reboot in Win2k!!

i added a PCI TV Card into my machine whilst still powered on and with Windows loaded and it found the hardware as soon as i plugged it in, i loaded the drivers, and it started the card, NO REBOOT

i was so impressed !

i can even disable my serial port when it crashes out then re-enable it again, saving a reboot, id never consider anything less then 2k ! - hopefully Win XP will be just as impressive as 2k was to me.

You actually had your case open and plugged in a card while the computer was on? I'm suprised you didn't get shocked.

yup, case open, connected to the net, talking on ICQ, i stood up, slapped the card right in, and carried on working while it installed the drivers, impressive eh?

I'm surprised that it didn't toast your machine....

Originally posted by xtstrike
yup, case open, connected to the net, talking on ICQ, i stood up, slapped the card right in, and carried on working while it installed the drivers, impressive eh?

That's impresive enough, but this is more impressive:

I had my case open all the time too, then decided to change the CPU (from Celeron to P3) .. so, pulled the fans out, took off the old CPU, put on the new CPU, put the fans back on ... Then I decided to add another 256MB of PC133 SDRAM ... all this without a reboot while I was still chatting with my buddies on ICQ :D :D Upgrade done in 1 minute, and my computer just ran faster!

Can you do that? ;)

cheers,
:beer:








PS: the above are truly not true ... I would be surprised if anybody believes that at all!

dektong: That can be done, and is done quite commonly, with high-end servers. When you have a server with 256 processors and 8TB of memory, you're going to have chips failing on you every couple of weeks, so these systems are designed to allow for hot-swappable processors and memory.

The same thing applies for different reasons for telephone circuits; because of governement-mandated uptime requirements, they use hotswappable switching cards, so that if one card fails calls (even calls in progress) get switched across to a different card without any perceptible break.

cperciva, argh... you are ruining my joke :D

But thanks for that info ... I did not know it was possible to do that :)

Besides, the context here is about my PC :)

cheers,
:beer:

and luckily enough i wasnt here to reply quickly enough thus allowing time for someone to correct you :-)

bwahahaha

i must admit ive not come across the hot swappable memory and CPU, hot swappable everything else, but not CPU and memory!

in huge systems i can imagine you can shut down "banks" of memory or a bank of processors and replace them if required, that would pake sense especially for the 99.999% uptime guarantees and above !

but still, it was a nice try :D

Why isn't Linux on the poll? Anyway i'm not using it neither.. Win98 se for me :)

Originally posted by determinist
Win98 se for me :)

Between Win 98 SE and Win ME, I voted for the latter one... Why? Because I don't have Win 2000 and Win NT is just not "plug and play" enough for me (also, my favourite game does not run on Win NT :D ).
And the reason I chose Win ME over Win 98 SE was because I recently build my second PC, using MSI 6315 motherboard (with build in VGA, LAN, etc). Win 98 SE gave me so many problems installation problems with this motherboard... I couldn't install the onboard LAN (using drivers provided by MSI), saying the onboard LAN is undetectable .... Everytime Win98 SE starts up, it always tried to detect some non-sense hardware (which I don't know how to provide the driver for) ... Then I decided to upgrade it to Win ME, and everything went without a glitch... I do believe Win ME has a better "plug and play", and after installing it, the onboard LAN could now be detected ... No more "new non-sense hardware detected" ... etc ...

Having said all this, I know that Win ME has its own problems that people hate ... But so far, it has been good, probably I should plan to upgrade to Win 2000 Pro?

cheers,
:beer:

windows 2000

Windows ME for me.

Its a lot more stable than Win98. I keep installing and uninstalling all kinds of stuff and the system doesnt crash as often as W98.

Cheers

Matra

I use WindowsME and sometimes Windows2000 Professional. I switched to WinME because of the

:puke:bluescreen errors

in Windows98 SE. Since i switched, i've never even got one single bluescreen - not with ME or 2000 :D

Also, if you are going to run a version of Win9x, try not to have more than 128mb of ram since it will be basically useless.

this is one of the oldest wives tales about win98
long ago shot down
just most aps etc.. do not need it yes it can help to have more ram esp for thigns like photoshop etc...

Any conclusion on Win OS?

Guess these release are quite stable, so if i were to upgrade, should i go for 2000k PRO or ME?

None of the above. Using win 95, altho i have all of them.
I also have Netware 5, redhat 5 and 7, caldera 2.2, FREEBSD 4, whistler, XP beta2... etc etc...

95 is most stable for gaming and browsing.... I Really like NT 4 for multitasking...


:cool:

Maybe this thread should be renamed "Which Microsoft OS". Right now, the title of the topic is rather confusing and useless. :P

Originally posted by MikeM
Using win 95

:eek:
Why? Its the worst MS O/S out besides ME

MikeM - id stop posting here and stop going on the internet if i were you, its common knowledge M$ has stopped support for 95 and that security patches have stopped, all the known bugs in 95 are wide open to the world and unfixable, and i just got your IP from the post you made, also IRC/ICQ/Web/E-Mail - anybody can get your computer to fall over easily !!, be careful

Xstrike

You'd really have to want somthing to do to even bother these machine's( win 95 ) to come after me.
These systems sit behind a hardware firewall, so I'm not really too concerned with getting nailed.
As well everything on the system is replaceable...... I've got it all backed up. You will note of course that This bulletin board logs IP address's and of course a simple script will record all kinds of info on a visiting computer.....

I'm not at all concerned about the security aspects of 95 and i prefer the stability to win 98 or millenium.

my desktop:win2k w/sp2
my laptop: NT w/sp6
personal server is on R.H.7.1
and our test machine is running This O.S (http://webmin.net/john/wXp.jpg) since last february.

Hello MikeM,

Maybe you can try using firewalls like ZoneAlarm etc.. to add protection and overcome at least some of the security problems due W95.

Cheers,

:beer:

Matra

Originally posted by elijah
my desktop:win2k w/sp2
my laptop: NT w/sp6
personal server is on R.H.7.1
and our test machine is running This O.S (http://webmin.net/john/wXp.jpg) since last february.

lovely choice of wall paper....

Hmm,

I was (and still am) running Win 98SE on the laptop, and got ME on the new desktop. At first I was appalled by lockups and crashes with it, but after a few days now it seems to have settled down quite nicely. With all the software/harware installing over the weekend it must have been rebooted a hundred times now, and I guess it's figured out where everything goes.

Plug and Pray seems to work very well. It picked up my 3d card and Win TV card instantly and collected the driver off the CD without a hitch (a total of five minutes on each card including unscrewing the panel.

I'd suggest giving ME a go, but just drive it hard for a few days and reboot it a lot to wear the 'parts' in. After that just keep it well maintained. I had an installation of Win 98 SE running fine for over 12 months without needing a refomat - they just need attention.. :)

Greg Moore

Originally posted by JTY


lovely choice of wall paper....




:beer: