I used W98 for a long time, switched to XP a couple of years ago at
home after using it at work before that. The reality is that
Microsoft software has always been mediocre, bloated and inefficient,
and a few years late in features compared to other equivalent
products. The fact it is #1 by a very large margin in market share is
a lesson in marketing.
I just built and am using a dual-core AMD XP machine with 4-disk (!)
RAID0, 2GB RAM, bla bla and yada yada. It's finally stable and I can
simultaneously burn a DVD, use Skype, and run a few other apps
(Dreamweaver, Picassa, emule, etc.) I don't think W98 could do all
that gracefully no matter the hardware. What it still can't do is copy
a large file without slowing down and getting sticky.
I like the look of Vista, but that's eye candy. I can't see what
Vista offers me that I don't have in XP, so I'm in no rush to
"upgrade". My next computer will be a laptop, either an Apple laptop
or a cheaper AMD laptop running Ubuntu Linux. I'm tired of MS
mediocrity and figure if I'm going to have continual difficulties like
I did finally getting XP tuned, I might as well not pay for it.
Besides I still remember fondly my 15 years using Sun Solaris at
work...excellent multi-tasking and features that Windows still doesn't
have.
I was working a temporary job where I had to use a computer. Just
before the job ended, they switched from 98 to XP. I was rather
shocked at first, but since we only ran several applications and did
not have access to the actual operating system, it did not much
matter, except for the fact that when we had 98, I knew exactly how to
hack my way around the block and get into the OS, and that just meant
I could open IE and go online while working. I got caught a few times
by the supervisor, but nothing was really done except I was told to
get off the net and do my work. But I know it would get back to their
programmer, because a few days later he would do something else to
make it impossible to get into the OS. However, I always managed, and
one day he asked me if there was any way he could keep me from getting
past the blocks. I laughed and said "probably not". He was a decent
guy and could have cared less. But when they changed to XP, I was
lost and could not do anything except run the programs I was supposed
to use. That sucked !!!
I am a bit puzzled that you said you cant run all those apps at the
same time with 98. With a computer as fast as yours, I'd think 98
would fly. 98 sure dont need all the power that XP does, so there
should be power to spare. I've been known to run as many as 10 apps
at once and that dont include having as many as 20 browser windows
open at once. This is a 500mhz PIII with 320 megs ram. About the
only thing that slows me down is playing MP3's using an older ver of
Winamp. Or running a virus scan. But I just do my scans when I go to
bed, and have learned to play music on my stereo rather than the
computer when I am running apps on the computer.
I have never even seen Vista running. I just heard what takes for
memory and cpu power and that sounds outrageous. I am curious what
Vista does that XP dont? What advantages does it really have?
Like I said, I dont much care for XP. I like to set my computer up my
own way, not have it all so generic that I am forced to use it the way
it comes from the box. I also know that the early release did not
allow for the use of Dos, and I tend to still use many dos apps. I
actually got dos apps that I set up in the early 90's that I still
use. They just get copied from computer to computer. I know XP does
have dos now, but I still am not real fond of it. I did install it on
a spare 10gig drive and once and awhile I swap drives just to play
with it. I have a friend who is always asking me to fix her computer
when I visit, so at least now I have an idea how XP works.
I have considered going to a Mac, but as long as I can run a computer
that works for what I do, I dont see a reason to pay for one. I mostly
just do the internet, some graphic editing and use office type
software. I dont use games, or watch DVDs on the computer, and the
music I do have is just some oldies that cant be gotten on recordings.
It seems to me that all the people that want huge amounts of power
only need it for games. Of course some of the graphic programs need
lots of power too, but I use an old version of Paint Shop Pro and that
really dont need much to run.
George
