jperl, well to continue the argument then I would say that the blame is on the software (installation). Most software just assume they run under win98, therefore making it hard to use with Win2000 (or XP by the way), because they ignore multi users support. don't get me wrong, none of Microsoft OSes are good imo. But I do think W2K is more adequate, it is faster and more reliable than W98. As pointed out in some other threads though, W98 is enough (and the file OS itself is faster since it does so little), it takes less memory too. But it is fragile. I used it for a very long time for trading. I had to be very careful on what I installed on it or not. And horror stories are well known with it. In fact my setup was like this : R&D on NT4 and Trading on W98 ! Because I would not install anything on the W98 mode other than trading tools and would be very careful with it. So I think I know your point. However, recommending W98 is a stretch in my mind. If you don't know enough about computers, oddly I would recommend W2K because it will help you keep a cleaner and more reliable system. I now using only W2K and it is fine. I try to use software which knows about proper use of windows (usually it is a sign of poor programming skills, when a software company delivers a program not multi users or not LAN aware nowadays. don't blame the OS for that. although you can blame MSFT for letting this happen for years!) Where we all agree so far : Avoid XP for a couple of years at least.
Major companies never install a new OS until a SE CD is released. There are bugs in a new system. Don't be the beta testers trying to find them all. Especially if you are trading with that OS. Robert Tharp
I am contemplating upgrading my Win98SE system to Win2000 or WinNT. Do you recommend I upgrade via an upgrade CD, or do a fresh install of the entire operating system? Thanks. -- SP
Punter, I am contemplating upgrading my Win98SE system to Win2000 or WinNT. Do you recommend I upgrade via an upgrade CD, or do a fresh install of the entire operating system? I've tried upgrading W98 to both of your proposed operating systems. It did a miserable job "upgrading" to NT (radically different registry structures, going from plug 'n play to no PNP, etc.) If you decide on NT I strongly urge you to do a clean install, it will avoid alot of bizarre oddities later. I've also upgraded from W98 to W2K and it certainly goes smoother than the above. Even so, I still ran into problems with dual-card video problems, networking printer problems, and other random quirks. Again, I would recommend you do a clean install. This is particularly easy to do with W2K (not as easy with NT) as it's so automatic, and it properly detects almost all hardware. Please note that you can often to a clean install with an upgrade disk. If you do a search you'll find that it's been discussed a few times at Elite.
stock_punter, Win2000 is also called WinNt 5. Win NT is simply an "older version" of Win2000. Both are very stable. Win2000 is much easier to install, because it recognizes most of the hardware, for Win NT 4 or lower - usually you have to install most of the hardware drivers manually.
Thanks Fohat, that helps a lot. Now I need to see if Dell supports Win2000 for my 2 year old laptop. -- SP
Punter, Thanks Magna. Since you've done both, do you prefer Win2000 or Win NT? Interesting question, with no clear-cut answer. I've got two machines, one has NT, the other W2K. I like them both. The only reason I installed W2K was for a Radeon VE dual-card that NT doesn't support. Both systems are remarkably stable, NT manages memory better, W2K is bulkier, more bloated if you will. W2K supports USB (which I don't currently have). If it weren't for the Radeon VE I'd probably still have NT on both boxes, yet I don't mind having W2K to play around with. They network with each other just fine. In short, you won't go wrong with either and, as mentioned, W2K is easier to install because you don't have to individually install most hardware drivers. It's not a big deal in NT, but it's definitely a tad easier in W2K since it has that useful Device Manager like Win9x.