Interesting thought, XP v 98SE!

  TonyV 20:00 08 Apr 2005
Locked

I read with interest this evening a thread in the Help-room Forum regarding going backwards and deleting XP and re-installing Win98SE. I must confess that whilst I have recently updated my system from Win 98SE to XP Home, I'm not that impressed with the speed of it lighting up. Mr Microsoft says that it will be much faster than previous versions, but after asking the question, myself, on the Help-room Forum regarding the speed, and trying out the suggestion of using Bootvis, it seemed to speed up once, but now is quite slow to start.

Do people really think that XP is that much faster than say 98SE, or are we just looking for something that is newer, but not necessarily better? It seems to me that there is a lot of new technology coming forward that really is taking three steps backward in regard to the method of operation and it's overall utilisation.

A classic is trying to video via a set top free-view box. It is useless, because it seems that you can only video what you are watching, yet everyone says how much better it is!! You cannot mix terrestrial and digital!

I am just passing comments, and do not expect to get any real answers just other comments.

  Charence 20:21 08 Apr 2005

I wouldn't say its faster than 98SE if installed on a PC with exactly the same specs. First of all Win 98 doesn't take up around 5GB of hard drive, its much less than that.

My other computer (bought in 1999) came with 98SE installed, and I remember it used to be 'very fast' (450MHz - top spec!) but now it has XP Pro installed on it and takes forever to boot up and open programs such as Firefox.

But I'm sure there is a reason for XPs slowness, its because its got more features...right? Well at least it looks better! XP is also much more easier/better to use and that dreaded 'blue screen' and 'Your program has performed an illegal action' no longer appears. In my opinion, 98SE is no comparison to XP!

Charence

  TonyV 21:07 08 Apr 2005

You are probably right, but I rarely had any major problems running 98SE, equally so, I get very few problems running XP, though there are some funnies that crop up occasionally. The point I was trying to make is that when these "new" systems come out, they are the best thing since sliced bread, but in reality, they rarely perform as the designers intended! For the price they charge, there has to be a very good economic argument put forward to splash out £150+ on the new system and the inevitable new applications that will become the thing to have! My machine is not the most modern, it has a 1.1ghz Athlon Duron and 512mb RAM. But I get the impression that the Computer Industry tries to out do itself and come up with goodies that are not that good in real terms!

  TonyV 21:15 08 Apr 2005

I have to say that the programmes I use, Microsoft Office Premium 2000 and Lotus Millennium, plus Quicken etc. all perform well in XP, but again they are no better than in 98SE. So I do wonder sometimes whether I did the right thing in spending the money on the new system. Obviously having got it, I will persevere and hope it will be OK. You are right Clarence, there is a bucket full of "Services" that seem to run in the background of XP which must inevitably slow it down a wee bit. I even bought an updated BIOS system, but have not had the courage to put that in to the system!!

  Charence 23:08 08 Apr 2005

about the programs, I think for them to run fast it depends on your hardware...plenty of RAM!

Hmmm, why do you want to flash your BIOS? I think, 'if its working, don't tinker with it'. I've flashed the BIOS on my old system before to enable it to cope with a 60GB HDD and was a relatively straight forward process, however, it took me about a month after downloading the files until I actually updated BIOS because I was worried I break the computer (due to warnings from the manufacturer saying that any damage can not be reversed, etc.). As long as you're sure what you're doing and have made some backups, updating your BIOS should be quite easy!

Charence

  DieSse 01:26 09 Apr 2005

Operatings systems are not just about speed. They're about stability, security, ease of enhancement, ease of maintainability and compatibility.

XP scores highly in many areas. It meanse at last Ms only have only one OS core to develop (the NT core), and without the baggage of the elderly design limitations of the Win95-98-ME core and filing system.

OS's have their times - Win95 et al was good at the time - it reached it's limits. XP too is of it's time, and has mileage left in it - it too will be replaced in time.

My personal experience is that XP is now far superior, much more stable, easier to use, and more forgiving when problems do arise. And with any reasonably modern system, more than fast enough.

I think IE and OE are, however in some need of revamping.

  CurlyWhirly 12:21 09 Apr 2005

"My personal experience is that XP is now far superior, much more stable, easier to use, and more forgiving when problems do arise. And with any reasonably modern system, more than fast enough."
I agree with your statement.


"I think IE and OE are, however in some need of revamping."
I dunno about OE, but Microsoft are currently working on IE version 7 as you probably know!

  LastChip 13:14 09 Apr 2005

There is not much question that it is more stable than previous Microsoft offerings, but there are downsides too.

There is also no question that it is the most bloated of the systems available for home use. If it goes wrong (and it does!), it is generally more difficult to do anything with. It is locked down tighter than previous systems, so if System Restore wont take care of it, without quite substantial knowledge it can become difficult to recover.

If you're using legacy equipment, it is very likely not to play well with those pieces of kit, particularly if SP2 is installed.

And the bottom line is, is actually doesn't do much more (for home use) than Win 98se was capable of, it just looks pretty and admittedly is more stable (in the right circumstances - see paragraphs below).

IE and OE are dead ducks as they stand and IMHO, anyone with the knowledge available here that are not using Firefox and Thunderbird as replacements by now, really do need to take another look.

If you have a brand new machine, with brand new peripherals and up to date software, then XP works and works well. But, for the majority, where all sorts of bits and pieces have collected over the years, it's just another operating system, and the Microsoft marketing machine will have you believe you are getting something special. Sorry. I don't go along with that!

  Stuartli 13:18 09 Apr 2005

>> A classic is trying to video via a set top free-view box. It is useless, because it seems that you can only video what you are watching, yet everyone says how much better it is!! You cannot mix terrestrial and digital!>>

See the Welsh DTV Trial thread, also in Speakers' Corner, re this subject.

You can record a Freeview programme or programmes and still watch terrestial TV (providing your STB has two Scart sockets, the STB is used first for the TV aerial input, followed by the VCR Scart links and then the television set).

  Stuartli 13:20 09 Apr 2005

The argument regarding XP and Windows 98SE is a no contest - it's the most stable and troublefree OS I've ever used from Microsoft and that dates back to the 1980s and Windows 3x.

  TonyV 13:32 09 Apr 2005

You may well be right regarding the Welsh DTV system since they have now gone to a fully digital system. However, I still maintain that to try and video something via the STB whilst everything is set to terrestrial is a nightmare. All I want is something that is simple and can be set by a simple minded person to video something on the Free-view system yet still have no problems watching the "normal" TV! Why does it have to be so complicated? Again talking about three paces backwards, I called in to the Panasonic shop this morning to ask the question why does the new Slimline TV we bought, coupled up to a Panasonic Video and Panasonic STB always flash around the screen when camera views change. We have the TV set to Panasonic Auto, which is supposed to correct any anomalies in transmission. The shop says there is nothing wrong with the TV, it is the transmission that is at fault!! That is progress, buy a new TV wide screen set and watch programmes that continually jump around!! The alternative, he said, is to reset the TV to 16:9 and put up with the black bands top and bottom!

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Nokia 8 vs Galaxy S8

Best new design books 2017: From vintage infographics to the the psychology of type

iMac 21.5-inch (2017) review

Nokia 8 : design, caractéristiques techniques, date de sortie