Windows XP or 2000/Millienium for home use?

na ^ | 01/01/70 | none

[Robert A Cook PE]

My daughter's PC needs to last about another 2 years (PC Clone, 128 Meg memory, 600+ MHz, couple dozen gig's left on the hard drives).

It's now Win98SE, but several functions and programs are obviously corrupt .... MS isn't supporting Win98 anymore, so I need to replace the op system. Typical use is college homework/family internet and email/games/CD's, and movie clips ...

Which op sys is better, given that I've got both XP-Home and Win2000 available?

[Robert A Cook PE]

(I can't stand Unix, or any flavor thereof, so Linux is not an option.)

Anybody have extreme preferences ... I know NT isn't correct,since it can't support USB nor many games, but which of their newer options is better?

[chaosagent]

Personally, under those circumstances I would recommend reinstalling Win98SE from scratch and stay with that. It's very stable. (At least for an MS product)

Definitely stay away from WinME.

I wouldn't sweat the part about MS not supporting 98 anymore. MS and Support is an oxymoron anyway.

If you don't have a copy of 98SE, it is still available in the stores for half what XP costs.

[Jhoffa_]

Windows ME Sucks..

I should know, cause I am running it right now.

Avoid like a rabid alligator.

[Swordmaker]

My suggestion is to re-install Windows 98SE and forget about upgrading. XP wants more memory than you have installed (it'll run but not as well) and really wants a faster CPU, ME is wierd, and 2000 and NT are as expensive as XP and more than she needs.

Windows98SE has millions of support people out there... they don't have to work for MicroSoft! I know, I am one of them.

[Robert A Cook PE]

I understood 2000 and ME were the same ... That's not correct?

[Jhoffa_]

That's not correct?

No, it's not. They are two different os'es..

Me is supposed to be like the "Windows 98 final" It seems to me to be little more than a tweak of 98 gone to the dogs.

Windows 2000 (which I don't have) is I believe closer to NT than Windows 98.

I know they are different and I can tell you from testamonials and personal experience I liked 98 way better than ME.

If my description of win2000 needs expanded then I am sure someone here can do that for you, but they are two different os'es for certain.

Bush2K is the resident Windows expert.. He will be able to give you a better explanation than I have.

[Eala]

I'd agree with the comment about re-installing Win98SE. Both Win machines here run Win98SE, my old 300 MHz and the wife's new 1.3GHz (the 1.3GHz was just set up -- the 500 MHz box that ran the Win OS is now my main Linux machine). As regards "support" for 98, as I understand it it means no more bug fixes, etc., to be released But 98SE seems pretty stables as it currently stands.

I have Win2K on my work laptop (466MHz, 128M RAM for Win2K) and it works pretty well also.

But we have a copy of WinXP Pro sitting on the shelf at home, uninstalled. Microsoft's XP registration verification policy is now so obnoxious that we simply refuse to install XP. (And if Microsoft keeps up their customer-unfriendly obnoxious policies, this household may eventually completely switch to Linux.)

[absalom01]

A consensus is developing here....
My experience with WinME is that it's a real trainwreck. Worse if you're running a small peer-to-peer LAN at home. Even worse with an NT server (strangely enough, it seems to interoperates well with SAMBA in a peer-to-peer setting, but since you don't like Finnish software that's irrelevant here.)
Based on my experience, for a standalone WS I'd go with Win 98 (3rd party driver (esp. sound) and game support is still the best). For a peer on a small LAN, I'd install W2K, as installation of shared resources like printers is smoother with this OS. Driver support is good enough with newer video cards, and is getting better.
Sorry, can't help with XP.

[Sungirl]

Here's a thread that's full of what you are looking for...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/635101/posts

[Bush2000]

A few minor points. Windows has evolved along two parallel tracks: Win9x (comprising Windows 95, 98, 98SE, and Millenium) and NT (comprising Windows NT, Windows 2000, and Windows XP). The Win9x versions are generally considered less robust/stable; however, they introduced more consumer-oriented features (ie. USB) sooner. From my experience, if you're going to use Win9x, I generally don't recommend WinMe under any circumstances. It's generally better to use Windows 98 SE. From what you describe, you don't have the computing power or resources to run XP or 2000. As others have correctly suggested on this thread, I'd stick with Win98 SE. Backup your data, reformat your hard drive, and start from scratch, if possible.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Understood. Thanks for the summary, and to all who replied.

[boris]

XP. Forget ME. And Win 2000 is due for a phase-out (read: no more support) within a few months.