[<<]Message[>>]    [<<]Author[>>]    [<<]Subject[>>]    [<<]Thread[>>]

Number   :  5026
Date     :  2003-07-14
Author   :  Charles Knox
Subject  :  Re: *OT* (Off topic) WIN98SE SLOW DOWN
Size(KB) :  1


At 09:05 PM 12/07/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>Here's my two cents: if you meet the minimum requires
>I *highly* recommend upgrading to XP Pro
>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/sysreqs.asp
>
>I do tech support for a major DSL provider who currently has banded with a 
>major internet portal. Can't mention any names but it should be obvious 
>enough. Everything on 98 is 10x more difficult than XP. 98 has memory 
>leaks, wastes resources, and is just generally shitty. Believe it or not 
>XP Pro would run better on a 300mhz w/ 128megs than 98 does, and the more 
>ram the better. Of course as a dsl tech we can not recommend upgrading 98 
>(in fact we're not suppose to recommend anything) but we roll our eyes 
>every time we get a 98/ME user on the phone.
>
>this is all my opinion, and if you don't believe me I don't care. Like I 
>said at the beginning it's my two cents...
>
Yes, XP will be more reliable and easier to configure than '98SE, but
whether it will run better on a 300Mhz machine depends on your definition
of 'better'.

My backup machine is a K6-400 w/ 192M. It runs quite fast (and mostly
reliably) on '98 provided you keep it defragged and clean out the registry
now and again (lack of maintenance is the cause of most system slowdowns,
BTW.)

With XP installed it runs like it was lubricated with treacle, but it *is*
easier to configure -- particularly, I suppose, from the point of view of a
'phone support tech who only has to get it running, not live with it...

I doubt if my opinion (based on some 25 years of assembling, repairing,
configuring and running the things) is really worth two cents -- let's say
one and a half.



This message if part of XXCOPY's message Archive.
The archive contains all the messages posted at Yahoo!Groups: XXCOPY.