********************How do you like WINDOWS XP?********************

From me ^ | 27 Oct 01 | Democrats are liars

[Democrats are liars]

Well, I just finished installing Windows XP on my computer. It did not go nice and smooth. I ended up reformatting my hard drive and starting from scratch. I know Windows XP sure does not like AOL 6.0. I am in the process of downloading AOL 7.0. I am still installing all my old software. Yes Windows XP locked up on me many times today and last night. Well, I guess I just would like to know how every one else is doing with Windows XP.

[roachie]

No. OS X 10.1 doesn't "work fine." Works supurbly. :)
After 6 years of MS-DOS, Win 3.1 and Win 95/98, I broke down and bought an iMac, and never looked back. All I do is fiddlefart around with the Net and do light wordprocessing. I bought a closeout Cube and 15" LCD screen and it ROCKS.

[captain11]

Heres the trick to XP folks. DO NOT TRY TO UPGRADE FROM 98 or ME. Choose the new install and leave 98/ME intact, you can than dual boot into the old ME/98 or the new and improved XP. Comon geniuses, argue with me and prove your ignorance !

How about if we hold a contest to see who can spot the most spelling and punctuation errors.

[PeterBarringer]

I'm still running at 96 megs of RAM.. I suck

[Democrats are liars]

Who cares if you like macs or windows. I just wanted to know how Windows XP was working on people's computers. Not speculation. Just the facts. The only people who should know if Windows XP works well are the people who are using the software.

[Architect]

I used Win2K for several years with 128MBytes. It sucked bigtime. Since XP is a sooped up Win2K, I gotta think it would be even worse. Get yourself some memory. It's cheap.

[bimbo]

AOL, the true mark of the beginner net person.

... and the twisted perverts who want to meet them in those chat rooms!

[A CA Guy]

Worst Windows product of ALL time. Leave your old OS on or wait for a better one. If MS doesn't get it's act together soon they'll go bust. Paying more for less is not a big selling point.

[Jolly Green]

Microsoft only got to the position they are in right now because they practically gave their OS away to start with. Now that they have virtually eliminated the competition they want some copy right protection to rake in as much profits as they can for as long as they can.

This is really a lame argument. Don't you believe in Free Enterprise. As a business man, Gates is entitled to charge whatever the hell he feels like. As a consumer you can opt to buy or pass. Simple as that.

Don't give my this crap about "eliminated the competition" drivel. AOL/Netscape is bigger than ever. Mac sunk themselves, as did Novell and a host of others. You can always buy a mac or a Unix derivative. Have you been in a computer store lately? 90% of the software titles are not Microsoft.

[A CA Guy]

Friends who had it on their computers had me Fdisk their computer and put Win98 2nd back on! NEED I SAY MORE?

[bootyist-monk]

Running it on all three of my machines. So far, XP looks like a winner to me. I didn't have any install problems, the network wizard took care of my intel anypoint home network (once I installed 2000 drivers) and my DSL line is also humming at about twice as fast as before. Overall, I'm very satisfied.

[tje]

I did a clean install on my omnibook 6000 and it went simple as pie.. I've given up on doing 'upgrades'.

[Illbay]

I made the decision to go to XP because of my very, very satisfactory experience with Windows 2000 on my beefier machine. When I saw that XP was going to have a "home edition" I decided to spring for it the first day it was on sale (hey, and I got a free music CD to boot!) and install it on my wife's 350MHz machine.

It's only been since Thursday, but it installed quite handily on her three-year-old HP Pavilion (to which I had added an upgraded 10GB HD and 512 MB of RAM) and it seems to be very, very stable so far. She likes it.

I'll let you know if and when I start having problems. I did notice there were "application compatibility" updates downloaded just as soon as the Internet connection came up. I won't be a bit surprised if there aren't quite a few patches over the next couple of months or so.

Her machine is not "mission critical," it just needs NOT to freeze up two or three times a day as it did before. I will wait, just as you suggest, before upgrading my working machine from Windows 2000 SP 2.

N.B. One thing I DID notice in upgrading her machine from Me to XP Home Edition, is that I was not, so far as I recall, presented with the option of upgrading the drive in place to NTFS, which I did do when I upgraded my computer from Windows 98SE to Windows 2000 about a year ago. I haven't had time to check it out, but now I wonder if the Home Edition even HAS the NTFS option! Don't see how they could leave that out, but when I booted 'er back up, I was surprised to find out it was still FAT32.

[Illbay]

What can your machine handle, though? My 500 MHz K6-II Linux box has 384 MB, and that cost me (I think) $210 when I set it up about a year ago.

If your machine can handle more, there is really no reason NOT to blast the memory up as far as you can take it.

One stick of 256MB will run you less than $40.

[PeterBarringer]

PIII 450.. i guess i should blast it up..

[porgygirl]

Your problem is AOL, not XP.

My son upgraded from AOL5 to 6, and it crushed his new HP computer. HP came to his house after three days of replacing parts and formatting hard drives, they went back to AOL5.The HP rep said AOL6 is the most insidious software known to man. It kills anything it does not like, and it does not like anything that AOL surmises is competition.My daughter upgraded to AOL6 on an old Packard Bell and it wrecked it so bad she had to throw it out.

Most likely AOL7 will be even more invasive.

I have had no trouble because, I have been AOL free since AOL3.

I run Road Runner and IE6, on a Thunderbird 1.2ghz, with 256ddr, with protection by Norton NAV, and Zonealarm. I am now virtually troublefree, and very quick.

[for-q-clinton]

I agree. But let's compare, running 3 programs at the same time on those same machines. Oh wait, that isn't a user experience the MAC user had until OS X.

Please don't take me the wrong way. All I'm saying they are completely different target audiences.

Apple has their niche followers that believe in the KISS principal above all else. They will leave behind features if they aren't easy to use. There's nothing wrong with that. Just like Unix vs. NT (early on). Unix had the power but NT people understood how to use it. Microsoft targeted the middle audience and won (if you define winning as having the largest user base).

[gratefulwharffratt]

It seams that if people truly understand activation AND still complain about it, it reveals that they tend to think they should get to buy the OS once and install it on as many machines as they want.

MAC OSes have always crashed.

I have been reading this whole thread, and I just have to say that you are someone who's advice concerning computers should be ignored with extreme prejudice.

Have you EVER used a Mac, or ANY distribution of Linux???? Do you make your living selling MS products or servicing them???

[gogov]

Always wait a year before installing a new (and major) upgrade operating system. It will take at least that long to get the bugs out and for other software manufacturers to put their patches in place.

[smith288]

No matter what OS your installing, ALWAYS do a CLEAN install. Upgrading is destined for slowness.