Can anyone tell me why WinXP/2000 is superior or better than Win98/ME?

[Nocturnal]

Like if you had to tell someone who had no knowledge of computers, what would you say?

 

[kurt454]

Tell them to try a Win98 box for two weeks, then try a 2000/XP box for two weeks.

 

[stash]

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Like if you had to tell someone who had no knowledge of computers, what would you say?

It's newer. Seriously, if the person was computer illiterate, that's really all they need to know.

 

[casper114]

Well for one thing NTFS file system security. For another Windows xp can perform on an active directory domain, and for another dynamic disk formatting is only available with win nt 4 service pack 6 and up I believe. Also win xp can support up to 2 terrybyte partitions on hard drives.

 

[casper114]

Oh i forgot file compression and encryption

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Like if you had to tell someone who had no knowledge of computers, what would you say?

I'd say Windows 9x evolved from the old DOS operating system and it wasn't capable of utilizing current hardware to it's fullest.

 

[bacillus]

Windows 2000/XP operating systems have a far superior memory management than any of the DOS counterparts.
Additionally, the NTFS filing system is more robust than FAT 32

 

[stash]

Well for one thing NTFS file system security. For another Windows xp can perform on an active directory domain, and for another dynamic disk formatting is only available with win nt 4 service pack 6 I believe. Also win xp can support up to 2 terrybyte partitions on hard drives.

zoom.....!

That's the sound of all of that going over the head of a person who knows nothing about computers.

 

[casper114]

You can put it in lamens terms now, I do it all the time (The question is being asked by a lifer so im sure he is capable of explaining it in lames terms himself). I was also a little excited to answer the question I have to admit.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: kurt454
Tell them to try a Win98 box for two weeks, then try a 2000/XP box for two weeks.

I've tried both for years and have been unable to document any benefit to the upgrade. But I have a small office, no large IT demands.

However, one benefit should be able to be quantified - hyper-threading on Intel P4's only works properely on XP (haven't verified this myself as I use AMD lately).


Fern

 

[Link19]

Windows 2000/XP are based on much newer technology where as Windows 98/ME are based on legacy code. Windows 98/ME are essentially 16-bit operating systems with a GUI capabvle of 32-bit extensions. Windows 2000/XP are true 32-bit operating systems and also handle memory tremendously better.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Link19
Windows 2000/XP are based on much newer technology where as Windows 98/ME are based on legacy code. Windows 98/ME are essentially 16-bit operating systems with a GUI capabvle of 32-bit extensions. Windows 2000/XP are true 32-bit operating systems and also handle memory tremendously better.

And in the case of XP, now have true 64bit support as well

 

[bsobel]

I've tried both for years and have been unable to document any benefit to the upgrade. But I have a small office, no large IT demands.

You should have your login revoked for that !

 

[Nothinman]

Windows 98/ME are essentially 16-bit operating systems with a GUI capabvle of 32-bit extensions. Windows 2000/XP are true 32-bit operating systems and also handle memory tremendously better.

And then what do you say when they ask: But I just bought this Athlon64, now you're telling me Windows isn't 64-bit?

 

[unfalliblekrutch]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Windows 98/ME are essentially 16-bit operating systems with a GUI capabvle of 32-bit extensions. Windows 2000/XP are true 32-bit operating systems and also handle memory tremendously better.

And then what do you say when they ask: But I just bought this Athlon64, now you're telling me Windows isn't 64-bit?

get linux! duh ;-)

 

[Link19]

And then what do you say when they ask: But I just bought this Athlon64, now you're telling me Windows isn't 64-bit?

That's alright if you aren't dealing with someone who has an Athlon 64. And 64-bit is still far, far away from mainstream isn't it? It will still continue to be a 32-bit computing world for a while when it comes to homes users. Windows XP x64 will mostly continue to just be for beta testing for the next few years right?

 

[stash]

Windows XP x64 will mostly continue to just be for beta testing for the next few years right?

Erm, what?

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/howtobuy/default.mspx

Edit: or do you mean beta testing of 64-bit apps? I'm confused...

 

[Link19]

Erm, what?

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/howtobuy/default.mspx

Just because the release of Windows XP x64 is already final, does not mean there are going to be mainstream application and driver support for it? I heard that it is just being released to the final stage so develpers can test it for a few years, but native 64-bit mainstream applications on a large scale is still a long ways away?

 

[stash]

I think the drivers situation will be better in the short term. And you'll need to define what a mainstream application is. Here's a list of 64-bit apps that are supported on Server 2003 X64 for example:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/x64/app64catalog.aspx

I don't think the problem will be finding apps to run, it will be finding apps that would benefit from 64-bit. I mean, would a 64-bit version of Word be useful to anyone? Not likely.

 

[Nothinman]

And 64-bit is still far, far away from mainstream isn't it?

Does AMD still sell 32-bit CPUs? If they did I would be surprised since their Athlon64s run 32-bit code just as fast as the 32-bit chips. Sure you can run XP32 on the AMD64 just fine, but if someone just paid for a 64-bit chip and you're telling them they're only using 32-bits of it, they're going to be disappointed and most likely will think they're only getting half of the speed out of it.

 

[Link19]

Even though the Athlon 64 is a 64-bit CPU, it is also the best 32-bit CPU one can buy as well.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

And 64-bit is still far, far away from mainstream isn't it?

Does AMD still sell 32-bit CPUs? If they did I would be surprised since their Athlon64s run 32-bit code just as fast as the 32-bit chips. Sure you can run XP32 on the AMD64 just fine, but if someone just paid for a 64-bit chip and you're telling them they're only using 32-bits of it, they're going to be disappointed and most likely will think they're only getting half of the speed out of it.

Yeah, Semprons are 32-bit. Some of them are Athlon64s with the 64-bit part disabled, others are basically AthlonXPs with the name "Sempron."

As far as the topic at hand, Win2000/XP let you make people non-Administrator-class users, too. Of course, watch THAT go zoom over the head of a Win98 user along with the rest

Things a Win98 user might comprehend & appreciate about WinXP:

• Native CD-burning capabilities
• Built-in support for Zip files
• Windows Movie Maker
• the picture-viewing applet with the handy rotate buttons
• Fast User Switching (handy for a family computer)
• If they get WinXP Professional, it will also have a long patch-support lifecycle at Windows Update over the years
• but it doesn't run Mechwarrior2 or Descent/Descent II in all their DOS4GW-powered glory :brokenheart: Yeah, I'm in for a rough life, aren't I

 

[AnonymouseUser]

I thought this thread was about the benefits of Win2K/XP over Win98/ME...

If so, then

Originally posted by: STaSh

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Like if you had to tell someone who had no knowledge of computers, what would you say?

It's newer. Seriously, if the person was computer illiterate, that's really all they need to know.

ME is newer than 98, so do you believe your statement is still correct?

Win2K/XP has better security (though very few actually utilize it), better hardware and networking support, and much better stability. Also, most newer apps have better support on 2K/XP and some only support 2K/XP.

Best of all, XP is prettier!

 

[duragezic]

Originally posted by: AnonymouseUser
I thought this thread was about the benefits of Win2K/XP over Win98/ME...

If so, then

Originally posted by: STaSh

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Like if you had to tell someone who had no knowledge of computers, what would you say?

It's newer. Seriously, if the person was computer illiterate, that's really all they need to know.

ME is newer than 98, so do you believe your statement is still correct?

Win2K/XP has better security (though very few actually utilize it), better hardware and networking support, and much better stability. Also, most newer apps have better support on 2K/XP and some only support 2K/XP.

Best of all, XP is prettier!

He's prolly aware of that, but c'mon we should just try to just forget ME ever existed.

 

[grrl]

Originally posted by: Fern
I've tried both for years and have been unable to document any benefit to the upgrade. But I have a small office, no large IT demands.
Fern

And you don't find 2000 more stable than 98? I had endless problems with 98, so I switched to 2000 and never looked back.