DDSD said:
I thought about Vista and I do plan on buying it, but only after it
has been out for a while. I put more trust in XP because it has been
out longer, is more stable at this time, and has more applications
and programs built around it.
Your choice, of course. I completely disagree, but it's your computer, not
mine. As I said, I find Vista completely stable, and all of my applications
that ran under XP also run under Vista. In my exprience, only a very
occasional utility doesn't run under Vista.
My specs are right now (I ran MS's
advisor test and other apps):
Don't rely on that. The Microsoft Upgrade Advisor talks about official
minimum requirements. Official minimum requirements and practical minimum
requirements are two very different things.
That's not a matter of opinion or my choice versus your choice. 128MB is
definitely *completely* inadequate to run Windows XP with anything
approaching acceptable performance. How much RAM you need is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation. You get good performance if the amount of RAM
you have keeps you from using the page file, and that depends on what apps
you run. Most people running a typical range of business applications find
that somewhere around 256-384MB works well, others need 512MB. Almost anyone
will see poor performance with less than 256MB. Some people, particularly
those doing things like editing large photographic images, can see a
performance boost by adding even more than 512MB--sometimes much more.
I would never suggest that anyone run Windows XP without at least 256MB,
unless you plan on running nothing but solitaire.
That will give you a very slow XP machine, but one that's usable. There's no
question that you need to upgrade the RAM. Regarding the processor, you can
get away with what you have, but only as long as you understand that
performance will be poor.
27GB free space
1024x768 high color display
Those will be OK.
Most people with Windows 98-era machines need to upgrade at least their
motherboard, processor, and RAM. It would seem that you fall into that
category. If so, you will probably find that it doesn't pay to do such
upgrades, and you'd be better off junking or giving away the hardware you
have (almost certainly worth well under $50) and just buying a new machine
that comes with Windows Vista. It will be the cheaper way to go.
And my BIOS were created 4/17/2000
So you're saying I can write over 98se with windows xp and not need
the first-time installation disc?
Yes.
This will let me keep my files
versus a clean install which would delete them, correct?
Yes. *However* (and it's a *big* however), whenever you take a step as big
as this, you always need to recognize that, no matter how unlikely,
something can go wrong. It would be foolhardy to do such an upgrade without
first making sure you have a backup of anything you can't afford to lose.
I also need to point out that your question makes it sound like you have no
backups of your data files. If that's the case, you are at extreme risk,
starting right *now*. It is always possible that a hard drive crash, user
error, nearby lightning strike, virus attack, even theft of the computer,
can cause the loss of everything on your drive. As has often been said, it's
not a matter of whether you will have such a problem, but when.
If I were in your shoes, I would make institution of a regular backup
regimen, backing up all your important data to external media, my highest
priority. It's far more important than what operating system you run.
