To XP or no XP?

That is the question.

Went to add a wifi setup to my win98 desktop the other day. Hard disk sounded a little loud, windows wanted to run scandisk thinking it might have bad sectors. It found a few and fixed things. PC sees it has a network card, but can't find the router hooked to it. Router works fine with my laptop hooked to it. Now the PC will dial the internet (yeah, still on dial up), but immediately disconnects when the server comes on. Again, not an ISP issue, as I'm using them through my laptop right now.

So when it rains, it pours...

As it is now, my desktop won't acknowledge my fledgling network, the hard disk may be about to go, and it won't connect to the internet. One thing's for sure, I probably should get a new disk.

At the same time, should I reload 98SE on it, or should I upgrade to XP? Believe me, I think 98 is probably more stable and secure, but I'm starting to wonder...

Is this a sign?

I'm running a 1.4GHz P4 with 384MB of ram, so the system should handle the upgrade okay. I'd like to hear from those who've done the jump. Would you recommend it, not, why? Would XP Pro be worth the money (double the price) or is home edition good enough?

Any quick replys appreciated, as I probably need to do something soon. Thanks!

to me xp is way better then 98 mot even in same ball park its based on nt. but its a tad bloated to me so i prefare win 2000, but it has lot a multimedia features xp does i mean

XP is a very stable OS.

Raggie's right. Do you want a toy or a real computer?

I like Win2k because the activation procedure is easier. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I don't know about the bloat. XP has eliminated some of the legacy stuff and actually boots faster than Win2k.

XP, definitely. Performs well and it's more stable than Win2K. I'm running XP on my work PC and I only reboot that once every couple of weeks.

You could get an argument about which is more stable, but not from me. I don't see any difference, but I don't argue.
At work we had NT 4.0. Mine used to run until there was a power failure.

I've had XP Home Edition since it came out and it's worked flawlessly. Just make sure that you load the updates that Microsoft issues on occasion.

If you don't have a source for the OS upgrade, look at eBay. I got mine there for a bargain price.

Marty

XP Home will work just fine, you don't need Pro. I don't know what the going rate for the OS is, but I do have an extra (brand new) Dell dimension desktop that I don't need. After the HD and OS upgrade you might be well into what I would sell it for. I'll take $499, plus actual UPS shipping charges (probably around $20 to MD.) I was just composing a post for the BST, so here are the details:


For sale is a brand new in box Dell Dimension 4600 computer. Pentium 4 2.8GHz with HT and 800 MHz FSB, 256K DDR SDRAM at 400MHz. No monitor or speakers. One year warranty direct from Dell. I got two of these and now find myself only needing one.


Dimension 4600 Series, Intel Pentium 4 Processor at 2.8GHz with HT Technology
256MB DDR SDRAM at 400MHz
Dell Quiet Key Keyboard
Integrated Intel Extreme Graphics
40GB 7200 RPM Hard Drive
3.5in Floppy Drive
Dell Application Back-up CD
Factory Install Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition,
Dell 2-button Scroll Mouse
Intel Pro 100M Integrated PCI NIC Card
DVD-Rom Drive
48X Max CD-RW Drive
Cyberlink Software Decoding for DVD Drives
Integrated Audio EA No Speaker Requested
SYMANTEC NORTON INTERNET SECURITY 2004,90 DAY TRAIL
Dell Jukebox powered by Music Match
Dell Photo Album Standard
Word Perfect Productivity Pack
Money 2004 Standard Version for Dimension
Microsoft Enclyclopedia,2004 for Dimension Type 3 Contract -Next Business Day Parts and Labor
On Site Response, Initial Year


Peter

BTW- I like things that go boom. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif What's the story behind your sigline? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thinking.gif

lol i never evrt crash my pc is on 24/7 overclocked to hect and back usaly runs at above amd xp 3200 speeds and its just a amd xp 2100,and it always being used not just on but being used now im captureing video

Raggie I think your problem is you don't download enough junky software from the internet. You probably don't spend a lot of time doing things like changing the color of the Start button either. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Marty Weiner said:
I've had XP Home Edition since it came out and it's worked flawlessly. Just make sure that you load the updates that Microsoft issues on occasion...

[/ QUOTE ]

For those of you also using Linux, you should read this thread on the Knoppix forum before installing XP security updates.

Looks like MS is up to its old tricks.

I second the recommendation for 2000. May not be as nice as XP, but it doesn't come with all of the "big brother" registration requirements. 2000 has been very stable for me.

Definately XP or 2000. They are way better than any versions that came before that. I use XP at home and 2000 at work. Like them both.

I'm running XP Pro on my notebook PC and 98se on my home PC. XP is a lot more stable than 98, but this is relative to the hardware configuration. You're current PC may have hardware that doesn't have XP support or drivers available. This has to be fully checked before attempting an update. MS used to have a utility somewhere on their site for checking hardware compatibility with XP, I'll bet you could still find it with a search.

Network setup is actually easiest with Win2K Pro, but XP is better than 98 by a country mile as far as ease of network and internet connection setup is concerned. It simply takes some time to get used to the changes to the user interface.

I was a big Win98 fan and kept it running at home even after I purchased, yes purchased a Beta version of 2000 a couple of years back. At work I use Win 2000. Love 2000 and the brainless way it accepts new cards, hardware ect compared to 98. 2000 is more stable than 98. I bought a new home machine last month at it has XP. I am starting to like XP better than 2000. Much faster boot, better multi user platform, better media handling. I picked up another machine for the house this week because I'm burned out on sharing with my wife and daughter plus I wanted to try XP Pro. I can't comment on XP Pro yet as I have all of 2 minutes using it.

From the sound of your machine I would suggest you buy a new one. If it died in midstream it would be terrible for you. I trust you are backing up frequently. You can buy a pretty studly machine for cheap.

[ QUOTE ]
bj:
...windows wanted to run scandisk thinking it might have bad sectors. It found a few and fixed things.

[/ QUOTE ]

You really need to get your data off of that drive ASAP. The code that OSes have to repair bad sectors in hard drives is a throwback to the old days when hard drives were simpler.

All modern drives are built with excess capacity and their own internal routines for finding their own bad sectors, without the intervention of the OS. When the drive finds a bad sector on itself, it marks it as bad and re-assigns some of it's extra capacity to replace the bad sector. That's what the extra space is for. The drive does all of this without communicating to the OS.

The fact that your OS is now fixing your drive with SCANDISK can mean only one thing: Your drive has been failing for quite a while already and it actually has so many bad sectors that the extra capacity built into your drive has now been completly re-allocated to replace them. That is the only reason that you are hearing about it from your OS.

Your drive is in danger of a catastrophic failure at any moment.


On a lighter note, I would go with W2k. When I set up my wife's new DELL (which came with XP) I studied it for a few days before I ever hooked it to the web. I disabled 17 processes that were either going to 'phone home' or else were set to do risky things like automagically download fonts from webpages without asking permission. After disabling those 17 things and installing ZONEALARM to replace the 1/2 firewall that comes with XP, I connected to the web. Of the 17 process I disabled two were servers that I had to turn half back on to get everything to work. Win2000 is much less creepy.

2000 pro all the way.
xp has way too much crap embedded in it that is just unecessary.
i am running a mix of w2k and mandrake linux here.
most of my boxes are multiprocesser.

Another vote for Win 2000. XP is really just 2000 with pretty buttons and lots of big brother stuff.

::sighs::

I'd say unless you get a new machine stick with 98SE like BF said ( stay away from ME [ I'm running all on new/old different systems])...... and definitely get a new HD ASAP like SUB recommends