Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Does any body really like XP so far...?

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
December 27, 2001 10:35:07 AM

Just wondering what so good about it? So many different opinions...

.."is your hard drive big enough...?" lady asked...

More about : body

December 27, 2001 11:40:05 AM

It's an AMAZING UPGRADE from Win98/ME but it's only an OK upgrade from Win2000. From a 9X/Me OS to WINXP, you get better stability, reliablity and performance inherent to the Windows NT Kernel, plus you get a wild new interface. For Win2000 users, you get slightly better compatibility and and a new interface; that's it. As you can see, moving from Win2000 to WinXP isn't as much of an upgrade as moving from Win98/Me to WinXP.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 27, 2001 11:49:28 AM

""you get slightly better compatibility""

I don't know about that one, I can play SOF on win2k but could not on XP...

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
Related resources
December 27, 2001 4:07:20 PM

i think winxp is da bomb!

What if your life moved.....2 inches to the left?
December 27, 2001 5:23:04 PM

There are always exceptions.............

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 27, 2001 10:00:32 PM

what is "da bomb"?

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
December 27, 2001 10:14:01 PM

It means it's really good. I take it your not from NYC?

What if your life moved.....2 inches to the left?
December 27, 2001 10:52:47 PM

you don't have to be from New York City to know, da bomb!!!

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 27, 2001 11:21:35 PM

Yeah, but NYC is a really cool place. Came to NYC from Bulgaria when I was 4, and stayed there till I was like 9 I think. Remember teh playgrounds my freinds and I would go to. Hehe, on hot days the block would open up a few fire hydrants, and make this huge sprinkler system. Oh, those were the days. This was when my parents were getting their Ph.D's at Columbia University, so I got to visit the robotics lab there. It was soo cool. Hmm, maybe that's why I'm a comp guy now:) 

What if your life moved.....2 inches to the left?
December 28, 2001 10:39:24 AM

Ya man, I thought you be dissin XP like it was a dud. I had to think twice myself:) 
I see a lot of post, people crying XP won't do this, XP won't do that. Boo hoo hoo.
I don't have XP, but I would still say I don't like it. It came out like sought a big deal and was suppose to be so great, something for everybody. To me it just seems like a very trouble OS. Even some people that use it say it's just OK, or have had some problems with it, or found something's that didn't work. And for being a big upgrade from Win98se I don't think so, you have your pluses and mines. My Win98se does everything I want it to do. My Win98se works with everything, all hardware and software with in reason and XP doesn't. I like Win98se over Win2000 which is close to XP it plays games better and I can trouble shoot my computer easier, where Win2000 doesn't have some of the features to do this.
I guess what ticks me off is if it's so great why so much trouble?
I wish more people would speak up and say how they like it or don't. But it does seem to be the same thing over and over.


defrage is child's play-fdisk
December 28, 2001 11:26:53 AM

""I wish more people would speak up and say how they like it or don't""

I think they are feeling like MS is watching over the shoulder, heh.

As far as XP goes, I like it how it feels, but to have it as an OS on my PC, I would not for now, even I play with it sometimes, it is VERY buggy, and does not work with my stuff I use. Especially SOF... I wish it did, sigh.


..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
December 28, 2001 2:12:01 PM

By SOF do you mean Soldier of Fortune?
December 28, 2001 2:38:07 PM

I like it. I don't think it's worth the update from 2000, but from 95/98/ME - for sure. IMHO it's much more stable.
December 28, 2001 3:17:08 PM

Quote:

As far as XP goes, I like it how it feels, but to have it as an OS on my PC, I would not for now, even I play with it sometimes, it is VERY buggy, and does not work with my stuff I use.

Correction: WinXP drivers are buggy, not WinXP itself!

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 28, 2001 5:11:57 PM

I like XP. Very stable. Also, makes it very simple to build an new system. Just put the disk in, and you have a new PC. Don't need to worry about loading up the via drivers (at least I haven't needed to load them up). I've had one problem with the new Nvidia drivers 23.11. Haven't had problems with any sofware loading. Games work great, RTCW, Counter stike, riven, quake.

Enough said
December 29, 2001 1:40:55 AM

Yes, I thought everyone knows, sorry, will be more clear next time.

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
December 29, 2001 1:49:38 AM

hehe, well ***_Man, if you say that Explorer.exe or IE crashes when I explore folders because of video driver, I rest my case then, gg. By the way, I use all the drivers from CD, aren't those tested by MS? (just wondering)

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
December 29, 2001 2:22:03 AM

Probably, yeah, cause it never happens to me! Anyway, what's with the ***_Man? You have a problem with AMD or something? I haven't seen anybody but AMDMeltdown use the *** or something like that to hide the letters A-M-D.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 29, 2001 3:08:00 AM

Yeah, what's w/ the ***_Man thing. He and I have different views on some things, but I still respect him. Showing disrespect is a sign of weakness the way u do it. Anyways, teh drivers on teh CD are tested...if they weren't then MS wouldn't put them there. IMHO, WinXP is great. I haven't had ANY probs w/ it, and I have used Win98SE, win2k, and winxp on my comp, in that order. Any dos based windows is a piece of unstable junk- that and its horrible memory management, and also the fact that 3D S Max runs horridly on it. Win2k is very nice, but kinda slow. XP is as stable, and way, way faster. Haven't had any probs w/ the 23.11's- and I have done some crazy sh*t with them! I am telling this truthfully...I care which product is best, not which is newer. XP is great- especially when set up properly. My comp hasn't been shut off since the end of last week!

What if your life moved.....2 inches to the left?
December 29, 2001 3:34:14 AM

I dig XP... I haven't had many problems with it.. and the one's that I have had I've been able to solve with a little effort.. overall though the ease of use, stability, and flexibility have far exceeded Win98SE (which is still a very good OS). I enjoy a little personal growth and challenge from time to time, so I don't mind the few minor problems I've encountered.

This thang has a whole new league of settings that I've yet to begin to understand, but having it work well without detailed understanding is great... and evenmore, being able to change and tweak things that are not available in Win98SE is even better!!

Ret
December 29, 2001 3:40:22 AM

Right on!

What if your life moved.....2 inches to the left?
December 29, 2001 8:11:49 AM

""You have a problem with AMD or something? ""

Not even one, running it now; I was trying to talk to you like to the _MAN, explain stuff, basically I was saying Man, well, I think enough explanations, sigh.


..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
December 29, 2001 8:16:57 AM

""My comp hasn't been shut off since the end of last week!""

Poor guy, get some sleep, hehehe, XP is great, but it not worth your sleepless nights since "last week", gg. I shut my PC down almost every morning, when I am tired of playing and going to sleep, heh.

PS: by the way ""XP is as stable, and way, way faster."" is not true, "way, way" is no way, Win2k is way, way faster under heavy, heavy load, read reviews, in other things they are almost the same, man.

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
December 29, 2001 2:54:51 PM

I'm talking about startup and some other things are faster. Sometimes those do matter when I shut off my comp, and the next morning, w/ 1 minute left before I leave for school realize I need to print my homework. Anyway, what is this thing called sleep?:)  J/k I actually have been running the UD agent thing for the THG team, and that's why.

My rice car will leave your R8500 in the dust!
December 29, 2001 10:25:09 PM

Quote:
Any dos based windows is a piece of unstable junk- that and its horrible memory management,

I'm using Win98se and my computer has been on for 5 days and hasn't gave me any problems. And it's doing everything I want it to do. Play games, on and off line, lissen to CD, vidios on line, searching. No problems. I think stability is over rated.
Another thing I think is over rated is the memory management. I don't have any memory problems, maybe once and awhile a program may hold onto it for a little while, but no big deal. For most user they won't understand or give a damn, let alone see any difference.
I used Win2000 I think it's slow, others say it's fast. I notice when I used it to open up or close program, it's like it had to think about it first. O you want to shut down let me think about it, let me check everything first, before we do that, a little while later it gets back to you, OK, it's OK to shut down now. If your ever in a fight send in Win98se it won't hesitate, it'll go in head first. While Win2000 will hesitate and might decide not to go in and give you the BSOD.
I too care about the best, Win98se is the best for me. Now if I did other things maybe I would feel differently. So I'm not fragging XP, at least not here and now, I'm limited to my fragging, because I haven't used it. But I do think it could be a pain in the *ss. And someone with Win2000 experiance would do much better with XP.

Anybody care to share with me what they do with their computer where memory management and the hype up stablity come into play?

defrage is child's play-fdisk
December 29, 2001 10:36:03 PM

Try opening 30 IE windows and I guarantee you'll get a BSOD! I need 30 IE windows constantly so WinXP is for me! hehe!

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 29, 2001 10:37:09 PM

Quote:

Not even one, running it now; I was trying to talk to you like to the _MAN, explain stuff, basically I was saying Man, well, I think enough explanations, sigh.

lol, hehe

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 29, 2001 11:26:45 PM

Jiffy, I use 3D Studio max, and that's a real memory guzzler. After running Max, and then say Half-Life, win 98SE would give me 2% free resources (1.2 Ghz T-Bird, 512DDR, Quadro DCC). Now, how can such a powerful system get low resources that fast- teh fastest I got 2% free was in 2 mins!!! Win98SE is junk for me. Maybe for u it's perfect, cause the apps you mentioned aren't intensive.

My rice car will leave your R8500 in the dust!
December 29, 2001 11:28:00 PM

Oh, yeah, and about stability. My dad trades stocks, so sometimes he uses my comp (even though he has 2 supercomputers at work), for small stuff. However, if there are stability issues, ie it crashes, that could mean serious loss ($$$).

My rice car will leave your R8500 in the dust!
December 30, 2001 12:36:03 AM

Completely agree with you, flamethrower!

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 30, 2001 12:43:40 AM

Quote:
Try opening 30 IE windows and I guarantee you'll get a BSOD! I need 30 IE windows constantly so WinXP is for me! hehe!

Yeah, Win98se wouldn't like that.
I realize XP is good for some depending what you use it for,
buy how many people need to open 30 IE?
And why do you need to open so many IE up? Educate me.


defrage is child's play-fdisk
December 30, 2001 1:23:27 AM

Tom's hardware (like 15-20 windows or so, one for each forum and refresh every 10 min), MS Word/Excel if I have hw, Borland Delphi 5, if I don't, ICQ, MSN and the odd card game such as the very addictive Spider Solitaire!

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 30, 2001 1:33:12 AM

Quote:
Tom's hardware (like 15-20 windows or so, one for each forum and refresh every 10 min)


Dude, how do you do this? I'd like to know! :smile: I'll probably do the same...

<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/btvillarin" target="_new">My Website</A> - updated basically everyday.
December 30, 2001 1:43:29 AM

Thanks for answering that. I can see how XP would be good for that. I may come across like I'm against XP, but I'm not. I still plan on getting XP, just as soon as I update this computer and have enough spare parts for another PC to try out XP. Which I'll use for the Internet.

defrage is child's play-fdisk
December 30, 2001 1:58:41 AM

lol, I refresh manually, F5!

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 30, 2001 2:01:23 AM

Ok, thanks. I was just curious what programs would benefit from XP and where 98se would suffer.


defrage is child's play-fdisk
December 30, 2001 2:06:12 AM

Anything professional will benfit from NT based OS:) 

My rice car will leave your R8500 in the dust!
December 30, 2001 3:18:50 AM

Cool....I just opened 100 IE windows and XP was running just as fast.

My rice car will leave your R8500 in the dust!
December 30, 2001 5:17:30 AM

HOLY MOLEY!

<font color=blue>Remember.... You get what you pay for. :smile: All advice here is free.</font color=blue> :wink:
December 30, 2001 5:24:17 AM

""Try opening 30 IE windows and I guarantee you'll get a BSOD""

""Tom's hardware (like 15-20 windows or so, ""

- so where is 30? and you won't get BSOD (dont really know what that means), but after 20 IEs you could get a message that "there is not enough memory, blah, blah, blah, try to close some windows, blah, blah, blah." on AMD system (never had that on Pee3 system), and what is really funny, _Man, but I have to admit that you have some brain, because after I get 15 IE windows open just to hold truck of what I am looking for, I am starting to get lost, so you are the _Man, hehe.

By the way, have you ever tried XP on AMD K6 or K6-2 series? It is slower than 486 with 98SE (just for the info)


..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
December 30, 2001 11:36:12 AM

I think everyones is just getting sucked into Microsofts marketing strategy. Sure XP is new and exciting but in my opinion "if it aint broke don't fix it". People should stop and ask themselves if the have done anything practical or productive with XP that they could not do with Win98SE. I tried XP and 99% of my daily computing needs(photo editing, video editing, music, games, surfing the internet, etc) can be done just fine with Win98SE if you have a fairly fast processor with a good amount of ram. I can do everything I need to do right down to video conferencing in 98. Windows XP has a lot of bells and whistles built in(this is microsofts marketing strategy that forces youto use their software)but you can find almost all these features in other programs that have proven reliabilty for Win98. Performance is not any better than Win98 cause I benchmarked both and 98 came ahead. So I ask this question again, Do you really need XP? Well if you have money to burn, heck why not?
December 30, 2001 1:04:33 PM

BSOD is Blue screen of death but of course it varies from computer to computer. You might just get an Out of memory message or a BSOD. 10 other windows are like ViaHardware, PCWorld, Sharkey Extreme, Anandtech, etc.

BTW, it has nothing to do with the processor. Win9x/ME allocate a limited amount of system resources for compatibility purposes. Once those resources are used up, you get crashes.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by AMD_Man on 12/30/01 10:13 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
December 30, 2001 2:54:26 PM

To bad WinXP doesn't clean house it would make this more one sided.

In short it sounds like were no farther ahead then from the beginning.

If you have Win98se get the upgrade, unless Win98se does what you want.
If you have Win2000 no need to upgrade.

This is debatably, but simply passed my means.


defrage is child's play-fdisk
December 30, 2001 3:36:16 PM

Quote:

If you have Win98se get the upgrade, unless Win98se does what you want.
If you have Win2000 no need to upgrade.

Completely agree.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 31, 2001 3:48:47 AM

The reason I asked here, is cos you guys are playing a lot with PCs and OSs, and sometimes I am asked by my friends to build a PC for them, and there is a dilemma with OS, and I have to give them a RIGHT decision to go with, cos they have kids who play their kids' games, which not always go with 2000 or XP, but they ask for "Best" OS there is, so I am kinda in the middle (I can fix 98 or ME if there is a problem, but they will come to me (you see what I mean)). So I asked this question to as many as I could to find out what is best way for now. I am sure in the future most of the software will be done for XP and NT core, but this "near" future is going to be for at least a couple of years or so...


..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
December 31, 2001 6:40:05 AM

Stability. That's the reason. MSFT should have got it right the first time, but 98se crashes left and right. ME didn't work at all. XP is pretty damn good. Definitely worth the upgrade.

<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>
December 31, 2001 7:37:38 AM

gg, dhlucke, did you just wake up? Win2k was out for 2 years now, and XP is build on it, heh

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
December 31, 2001 12:18:48 PM

It all depends on your system. Surely, you cannot expect 98SE to run great on an economy line system. I had nightmares with 98SE when I first started building systems. Win98SE needs at least a 1 ghz processor, 256 mb of ram not to mention a good chipset on your motherboard to run properly. It needs lots of everything. Most people who run 98se are below that level. Most computers that come with XP are at this level already and sure, their gonna run fantastic. I'm not saying 98se is the best but a properly configured system with 98SE installed will definitely hold its own(performance wise) against XP. For someone who does not want to spend the money, and can get a copy of 98SE for nothing, what the heck, it aint that bad. Myself, I run 98SE on one rack for gaming and when I want to do my video and photo editing I take out my 98SE drive and slide in my W2k rack.Its like having 2 separate computers. You can't go wrong that way.
December 31, 2001 12:44:21 PM

What?? Win98SE DOES NOT NEED a 1GHz processor and 256MB RAM! What are you talking about? lol, I'm running it on my P133 perfectly! I'm running WinMe on my AMD K6-2 450MHz machine also without problems.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
!