Upgrading to Windows 2000, XP or whatever

[Dark Dragon]

Y'know...I am contemplating the concept of upgrading to Windows 2000 or XP basically to have updated drivers and all...however there are already a few possible obstacles...one is that I am concerned that my current equipment will not work if I upgrade, and to tell you the truth I really do not have the energy to sit for hours on end trying to uninstall and re-install everything in the futile hopes that my stuff will function.

Another obstacle is the current programs I have such as Fireworks, Dreamweaver etc. Will they still function or will I have to undergo the arduous task of reinstalling them?

And I hear that Windows 2000 and XP have created various problems such as printer problems, internet problems etc.

So IF I decide to upgrade ( a very big "if" ) what one would be better?

[Jona]

XP originally had some security errors, but have you ever used XP? When the computer "locks up," it tells you to press ALT+CTRL+DEL, whereas in Windows Me, 98 or 95, the computer just plain freezes. XP can also be taken from the "new look" back to the look of your Windows 98 desktop's appearance, which is good. (OK, I like it either way.... But a WSXUGA+ TFT screen would be nice! lol)

[Nevermore]

Windows XP is the most stable Microsoft platform ever. It is based on Windows NT, so support is basically as for NT, but with of course some differences.
The start menu becomes 'intelligent', moving your most used links to prime positions. Internet Explorer can be completely removed, as can many components that you had to leave as default in other windows OSs.
Another thing to think about is the OS you are using at present. If you are using 98 or older, there is the problem that Microsoft support is discontinued. Also, many new programs will begin to lose backward compatibility.
XP is the most resource hungry OS on the market, so if you have an old computer, you may have problems. The minimumsystem requirements as detailed by Microsoft are:
* PC with 300 megahertz (MHz) or higher processor clock speed recommended; 233-MHz minimum required;* Intel Pentium/Celeron family, AMD K6/Athlon/Duron family, or compatible processor recommended
* 128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)
* 1.5 gigabyte (GB) of available hard disk space.*
* Super VGA (800 × 600) or higher resolution video adapter and monitor
* CD-ROM or DVD drive
* Keyboard and Microsoft Mouse or compatible pointing device.

For the full requirements for XP home device use, go to http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/evaluation/sysreqs.asp,
or for the full requirements for each device to use with XP pro, go to http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/sysreqs.asp
One of the biggest problems with XP was that service pack 1 was causing it to crash almost irreperably, and it was very difficult to remove it. However, service pack 2 has had very few problems.
XP supports full raw socket access, which allows IP address spoofing. This makes it a very attractive prospect for hackers, as they can hide their identity. This feature is totally unneccessary, and can be deactivated with a free download from http://www.grc.com (socket lock). This will make your computer less use to hackers.
As another secruity precaution, XP includes a free basic firewall. However, zonealarm (http://www.zonelabs.com)
is a better, free, firewall.
Basically, XP is the best window OS on the market. It is not without it's drawbacks, but these are mainly very minor.

[Dark Dragon]

Okay, thanks for the info..I shall have to research this further.

[Nevermore]

If you need any help, you need only to ask.

[havik]

Basically, XP is the best window OS on the market.

I know people who will duel to the death against this statement :D I on the other hand am happy with my windows OS but I'm looking at trying Red hat Linux.

Getting to the subject at hand. There will be a few programs that would need to be re-installed for sure. I base this on the fact that some programs are installed on your comp specifically for your OS. Also, the OS is basically the user interface to the hardware. Changing this interface will undoubtly cause some problems with certain software.

Havik

[Nevermore]

Specifications-wise, there can be no disputing XP's crown. It is also more secure and faster than the others. It is only in personal preferences that things can be different.

[Jona]

Havik, RedHat Linux is pretty cool, my friend has it.. But it's a bit different from Windows. There is no, "C:\" or anything like that. It's got basically the same system, but it's.... Different. :rolleyes:

[Nevermore]

Do you like it?

[Jona]

Well, I think it's neat and all that but.... Man, I'd still stick with Windows myself. Windows is faster and more secure. Stability is about the same, though... Well, Windows XP is much more stable than any other OS I've ever used.

[jeffmott]

cijori, what exactly is specifications-wise supposed to mean?

Linux is a flavor of Unix, which is well known for being more stable and secure than any version of Windows or even Mac. This is why Unix/Linux is the OS of choice for any kind of server. But, as I'm sure some have noticed, it is designed more for the computer literate and thus can be seen as less user friendly.

But when compared only to the Microsoft line of OSs, XP is easily the best.

[Nevermore]

I was only comparing to Windows OS, sorry if I didn't make that clear. Linux, Unix and Mac OS are all more stable and secure than XP, if only because less viruses etc. are written for minority OSs. The problem is that, while Linux can be great, it can also be a $&£*! to set up or repair, and may not be compatible with office software.

edit: By 'office sotware', I mean software at the office.

[DaveSW]

I'd heard XP was the most INSECURE os on the market because of the remote maintenance features... Or have they fixed this?

I use ME, and it's quite stable. alt-ctrl-del works fine, and there are very few occasions when it crashes completely. 2000 is very stable too.

(Linux) can also be a $&£*! to set up or repair

yeah, I've failed every time I've tried. I tell it to auto partition, and it tells me the drive is too small - 20gb!

[pyro]

Originally posted by DaveSW
I use ME, and it's quite stable. alt-ctrl-del works fine, and there are very few occasions when it crashes completely.You are the first person I've ever heard praise Windows ME... ;)

[DaveSW]

Initially it used to crash, but now I have the skill of taking it right to the edge and stopping before it crashes LOL. I've switched off all the features which rearrange your menus, turned off all the 'hide advanced features' and now it's just like 98, just more stable! GR8!

I also use it on powerful pcs LOL.

[pyro]

I would never choose ME over 98. Certainly not as far as stability goes... I guess maybe it's just me...

[DaveSW]

Well, it went out to the chap who builds our computers, I asked for 98, my dad messed up telling him that, so we got ME. I was a bit P*ss*d off, as you might imagine, but I have grown to love it. well. kind of.

[Jona]

I would always choose ME over 98 for one reason, and one reason alone. ME has a system restore function that Windows 98 does not. But as far as stability goes, Windows 98 whoops the rear-end of ME by a long shot. XP is better than either because it is very stable and has the system restore funciton. Also, Windows XP has *the best* defragmentation program I have ever seen on any Windows OS. It works very well and doesn't restart every time you move your mouse.

[havik]

a better defragmentation? Does that mean I can stop defragging in safe mode on 98? :D

Havik

[Jona]

Yes, better defragmentation. lol.

For some reason, I couldn't take the Notepad off of Windows XP and put it on my Windows ME. Does anyone know why/how? I'm getting the feeling that I can't do that with the defragmenter, either, although I haven't tried it.

Any ideas?