WIN 98 vs XP

Have been using WIN98 for some years. Thinking of a new computer containing XP. Have heard that XP will not load and/or open old software; is this true? If so; can I order two hard discs and place each operating system on a separate hard disc? Would this allow me to open one or the other (98 or XP) as needed?

 

Quite the opposite is true. XP has great backwards capability. You can dual boot on one hard drive, if you decide to do that, but it's not necessary from a functional standpoint. Make the jump to XP- I think you will be pleased.

Johanna
No, I don't work for MS, but I do work on a lot of OLD computers...

 

I know when I was "Multi-booting" with... "98" and "XP ", or "ME" and "XP "... I had no problems what so ever with "XP" reading or applying any of the software that "98" or "ME" was using... I could see the files fine and use the programs fine... but as you know... It can't be done the other way with "XP" using "NTFS "... I mean "98" or "ME" reading "XP" or using those programs.
I ended up just going totally with "XP" because after awhile you'll notice that theres no comparison in over all performance... "Pro" that is.

 

I was the same way, I kept my 98SE and got another hard drive for XP and have the dual boot, found out my scanner, and my MS joystick would not work with XP, other than that everything else works.
It's very easy to do if you have 98SE installed first, then install XP, it will ask which drive to install it to.

Good Luck, HooT

 

You fellows are great and I am convinced to go ahead with XP. Now for the next step in buying my new computer. One place says Pentium P4 is the only way to go. The next place says forget Pentium, you want AMD Athelon 3200 as your CPU. Anyone care to give me their opinion. I value it more than persons trying to sell me something.

 

AMD is better on your wallet, I have an Athalon 2600 333 fsb - 2.08 GHz. fast. I think it's great, I have no complaints.
HooT

 

You want a fast central processing unit (CPU) and a generous amount of memory to make XP run well. A fast video card with plenty of memory too.

AMD processors are usually less expensive than an Intel of the same or similar speed (P4 in this case).

I have run AMD's for some years now and for me, they are as good as the similar Intel for less money. There have been processors in the past from other companies that ran fast but didn't work right with all the features of a PC. AMD hasn't had that problem with anything I've tried in at least the last 5 years.

I can't say for sure about CAD programs since I don't do any high end design work but 'normal' stuff works fine.

 

AMD, baby...ain't no substitute. Wouldn't buy a Pentium- worked on too many of them and realized how spoiled I am. I like my computer because it's point and click. It doesn't much care what I demand of it. I could bring a Pentium to it's knees! LOL and I have an "older" AMD- just a 1.66 (hey, at the time, it was the best there was!)



Johanna

 

I agree with al the praises to WinXP: it is better, more stable and has good backward compatibility.
There is a problem though: you CANNOT run any apllication that makes direct access to the hardware!! For instance, I have a special keyboard that connects to the LPT port, for my kid. It comes with a software of its own. And there is no way that it would work in WinXP.
So take that in consideration.

Besides that, only good things.

Good luck.

 

And I dis-agree with XP being more stable.

I found that instability problems were more my doing ( in both SE and XP ) than the OS.

Changing the order in which programs were run was one fix. ( in both )

And maybe more important Control what loads at startup

In both SE and XP there is a lot of stuuf that loads by default that is not needed.

In SE the only things that realy need to load at startup are Explorer, Systray and Scanregistry. And of course the Anti-Virus program should be loaded also.

A lot of newer software INSISTS on loading at startup.

The first thing I do after installing new software is to check the startup sequence and see if it has added anything and shut it down.

BillyBob

 

including WinME ...... ......

You want to discuss unstable Operating Systems ? I found ANYTHING ( even Win95 ) to be better than ME. Even I could not make ME behave. It fought me harder than even XP.

Believe me my Friend you are not alone there. I have had various Paid Techs that can not figure it out either. When I went to a Tech shop to get somethings for someone else the Tech and I were discussing the SE issue. He actually came to my home IN PERSON and still did not believe it.

My answer to him was " Maybe it is because I control it. Not it controling me. " He did agree to that.

Another thing is that I NEVER install more than one new program at a time. I install one and then wait a day or two before installing another. With several Windows restarts in between. And if there is a problem I do my best to fix it before going on to the next item.

I myself think that may times users try to install too much too fast. And not giving Windows a chance to settle itself out before doing the next install.

My BIGGEST problem with both OS was the VIDEO. Getting the right set of drivers THAT WORKED was somtimes tough. In SE I am running Video drivers that are generation or two old.

You may ask WHY ? And I will answer. They are the ones that WORKED across the board with NO problems.

I do not know how either SE or XP would behave if put in clean. I have not done it. SE was put in overtop of 98FE. And XP was put in overtop of SE.

And I hear you saying. " How in Heavens name can he do that ?" And you are not the only one to aak that question either.

I think 98 FE was the last OS to go in clean. And that was only because I did Format the HD after a VERY unstable ME.

Other other than a couple of programs that are in XP and not in SE I would not know the difference whether I was on my 98SE HD or the XP HD.

In fact AFTER we finished out Golf game with our Friend in Canada Tuesday evening only then did I realize that I was on my 98 SE HD. I wondered during the game why is was behavving better then the week before.

I do not use Dual Boot. Only one HD is plugged in at a time. I tried Dual Booting twice. Once I AS THE USER messed up and killed BOTH OS. The 2nd time a HD went bad on me and lost both OS.

Oh BTW. If I do have any problems I come here and ask for help. And so far the few that I have had have been solved VERY quickly.

MY wife tells me that this BBS is my 2nd Home. She could be right.

BillyBob

 

Hi BB,

*I found ANYTHING ( even Win95 ) to be better than ME. Even I could not make ME behave. It fought me harder than even XP.*

I quess this is what makes this subject - computers/software and interaction between the two - so interesting.

My experience with ME is sort of like yours with SE, never had a problem with it other than of my own making. And like you, am also greeted with polite disbelief

My only gripe with ME is the infamous built-in memory leak.

Regards - Charles

 

WOW-ask for info and I got it; all of it good. I do have one question to BillyBob. You say you have each OS on a separate drive and you "switch" between them as needed. My question: how does one do this? I imagine both drives are permanently attached to the mother board. Do you switch electronically or manually? Sure would like to know how this can be done.

 

Hello Marvin,

I set up a dual boot ME/XP system almost two years now.

The following is how it was done, and the questions I asked before doing it. Did this with two HD's, two was my preference because of the backup possibilities.

http://discuss.pcmag.com/n/main.asp?webtag=pcmag&nav=messages&msg=3758.1

http://discuss.pcmag.com/pcmag/messages/?msg=3688.7

Regards - Charles

 

98 was good, but it is over, and we must kiss it goodbye and move on... times change. All new software is being written for, and all new hardware is being designed for, the OS of the present, XP. Fred Langa ( a techhie hero) says 52% of the world is using XP for an OS. 48% is Macs, Linux, etc and the older versions of Windows. XP is here to stay, and it will consume more of the market as people upgrade obsolete versions of Windows. FWIW, I have never run into any software designed for any version of Windows that XP couldn't handle (upgrade patches were sometimes necessary) with the exception being Easy CD Creator. (Some systems run XP and Easy just fine, some just don't.) So, holding onto an old versions of Windows because you are worried about your current software is not necessary.

Billy Bob,
Have you ever thought that perhaps your lack of SR points was from not doing a clean install of XP? Just wondering...

Johanna

 

Hey Christer,

Actually didn't have you in mind. My apologies if I gave that impression.

Meant support people that I've talked to and others that have had no end of trouble with ME.

Regards - Charles

 

Close but not quite.

Both drives are mounted in the case. All I need to do is slide one side back and switch the two plugs.

After powering down of course.

I haven't gotten to it yet put I also have a 3rd HD that will eventually be set as a slave for both. But still all I would need to do is change the one power and one ribbon cable plug. And I would need to reset the jumpers on the two main drives.

on the subject of WinME since he likes very much to shoot that OS to pieces.

You got that right

But no matter which OS we discuss, there will ALWAYS be some that is good for and some it is otherwise.

But no natter which OS I still think that it depends a lot on the combination of hardware, software and the operator.

If the three are not in good communictaion with each other then things may not go to well. Good communictaion = good results.

And finding and using WHAT WORKS and not just what is supposed to work makes a difference too.

And what works for Christer may well crash my machine. and the other way around.

And I see SE & XP as very close to equal.

ABSOLUTLEY

These discussions tend to bring out more than one side of the story.

BillyBob

 

Johanna

Billy Bob,
Have you ever thought that perhaps your lack of SR points was from not doing a clean install of XP? Just wondering...

I was just going back over this post and realized that I either missed ( or forgot ) about this.

A good thought which I would not rule out as a possibility.

Other than needing a new OS to train that is about the only reason I have XP Pro on here.

It is not ( as you folks well know ) because I needed a better OS.

BillyBob