Windows XP, are you ready?

[reboot]

Windows XP will officially be released tomorrow. Here's a compilation of information all about it. I've weeded out the less significant parts, and expounded on some of the more important aspects of it. I hope a few of you will find it some use in deciding if XP is for you or not.

Take the articles you read with a whole pound of salt, not just a grain. You'll notice they're mostly written by tech types, who (allegedly) prefer Linux to Windows, mostly because they have a hate-on for big corporations. Once you get past the stupid prejudices of these id10ts, you should be able to make up your own mind about XP. The idea that it's a hybrid of Win2000 and WindowsME is totally ludicrous. Sure, it's got some eye candy, but the heart of XP is NT/2K with added stability, and far more application and hardware support. It's smooth, it (almost) never crashes, and providing you run the "Update Advisor" to see how compatible YOUR system is, and take it's warnings seriously, there should be no problems. The naysayers have mostly NOT heeded the warnings (or don't understand them) and ended up with problems. No matter how minor (gee, my ZoneAlarm doesn't work, or gee, my EZCDCreator doesn't work) the articles they write make it seem like the end of the world. FYI there are already updates for ZA and EZCD if you know where to look, and the official updates will be posted on the 25th (official release date of XP). XP's biggest downfall, and everyone's major concern, is the "Product Activation", aka WPA. The "Home" and "Pro" versions will both have it, and it's IN YOUR FACE until you register (30 days from install). This is NOT renting the OS, you buy it, you own it. It's Microsoft's way of trying to prevent fraud and theft. Can you blame them? Of all the hype around the WPA, it's a simple, painless procedure, and unless you are changing your motherboard and CPU every 3 months, you will have no troubles. Changing the amount of RAM, or installing a new burner will NOT crap out the WPA, however reinstalling will. Not a problem, look in the C:\windows\system32 folder for the Wpa.dbl file, and copy it somewhere safe. After you run a reinstall/repair, just copy that file back into c:\windows\syste32 and you won't have to reactivate anything. This is DIRECTLY from Microsoft at http://support.microsoft.com/support.../Q302/7/40.ASP So...you currently own Windows 98, and you have to reinstall every 6 months, like it or not. Welcome to XP. You will NOT have to reinstall every 6 months, you won't have to immediately dive into the registry to tweak it, and you won't be searching the web every second day for a new driver. If you install a driver, and you don't like it, it doesn't work, there's a "rollback" option, which will uninstall the driver, and automatically roll back to the previous driver version. There's a GUI for just about everything, and more than the average user will ever want to investigate. What would a Microsoft release be without complaints and conspiracy theories? Windows XP is no exception. The most notable controversy in the days leading up to its release was undoubtedly the new Windows Product Activation (WPA), which is designed to help Microsoft improve compliance with the Windows license agreement. The agreement states that each copy of the operating system can be installed on only one machine at a time. Such a restriction is nothing new, but Microsoft has never been able to enforce it adequately. WPA requires you to activate Windows XP (via the Internet or telephone) within 30 days of installation. If you wait too long, you'll be locked out of the system. To activate Windows XP, WPA creates a nonunique value based on up to ten pieces of information from your video card, network card, SCSI controller, hard drive, CPU, and memory configuration. The tool then uses a combination of the 25-digit product ID code and the nonunique value to create a number, which Microsoft exchanges for a code that activates your copy of the OS. Microsoft has made some concessions to power users. For example, a copy of Windows XP can be reactivated every 120 days, in case you change hardware or systems often. Of course, many users will never experience WPA. Most PC vendors will preactivate Windows XP. In addition, vendors can key Windows XP activation to a single value in the BIOS. You then can change everything in the machine without reactivating if the BIOS doesn't change. And corporate customers can buy volume licenses, which don't require activation. For those who currently have Win2k, the transition may not be as worthwhile, but it will be totally smooth, and as with ALL Microsoft OS's, a clean install works better than an upgrade, although...IF you run the upgrade wizard, and IF you don't get any dire warnings, and IF you get any software updates for your software (ZA for example) an upgrade from Windows98 is smooth as silk. XP's security and networking capabilities are HUGE. Something that's becoming more important, as housholds are becoming multi-system, and users want security for multi-user computers. In a nutshell, the registration (WPA) is painless, do it, forget it. Remember that most software and hardware vendors WILL NOT have any "official" upgrades available until after the 25th. If in doubt, run the upgrade wizard to check for hardware and software compatibility, THEN go to the website, check if they have any updates for XP. If they do, you're flying. Upgrade Advisor: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...ng/advisor.asp If the 50 meg is too much for you to download, try this test: http://www.pcpitstop.com./xpready/default.asp or get the cover CD from November's issue of Maximum PC Magazine, which has the full XP upgrade advisor included. If you are using Win 9x/ME, it will be worth the amount you shell out to get yourself XP, preferably professional version, although Home might be OK. The Windows 9x/ME kernel has been a proven failure, and FAT32 has been nothing more than a laughable scam. You will benefit from increased features, and increased stability, based on the NT kernel, this thing is as close to unshakeable as any MS OS has been. You have to realize too, that XP is meant to be much more than a simple OS, it's an entire software bundle for you in one ... from a feature rich multimedia player, to CD writing software, everything has been taken care of. Which should save you quite a few $s on buying it all, and save you time online from trying to download other software. If you are using Win2K, it is highly likely that you are in it for a robust operating system, with emphasis on security. Under those circumstances, staying with win2K makes the most sense, because it is a proven winner .. it is stable and secure, and the bugs have been mostly patched, there isnt really a reason to jump ship at this moment, not until XP-Pro-SP2 is out. Speed...it's faster than 98 on my dual boot system, and would be even faster if I had it on my ATA100 controller, instead of the ATA33 motherboard one. Resources...it's a hog, no doubt about it. It eats RAM like candy, but never (rarely) uses the swapfile (paging file). On a 512 meg system, it eats between 90 and 150 meg starting up, depending on how much stuff you have in the taskbar, and I have a LOT (well, it's a lot for me, as in 98, I only have 2 things, in XP, I have 5). It's ultimate draw is it's stability. If Explorer ever crashes, an icon is gone from the taskbar, and Explorer relaunches on it's own. You don't even need to restart for most software installs. Built in cookie cruncher and firewall, stuff that we all want/like, but usually rely on a (proorly written) 3rd party app to do. CTRL+ALT+DEL actually works! No more waiting (at a blue screen) for the "End Task" dialogue box... Is it worth the $200 for the full version? Only you can answer that. I have a feeling that the upgrade version will suit most people. Just run a fresh install of 98, then run XP over top, then install the software. If in doubt, run the advisor, it actually works, READ the warnings, and HEED the warnings, and it will tell you a lot more about how YOUR system will behave in XP. Windows XP Upgrade Tips Windows XP will be available in two versions: Professional and Home Edition. Both have the same core features. Windows XP Professional adds features intended for corporations, such as a high-security encrypting file system, roaming user profiles, Netware support, and user interface settings that default to a business-oriented look. Most of those are features only an IT department would love. Variable Cost Windows XP Home Edition and Professional each will have two prices, depending on whether you upgrade from an existing Windows system or install Windows for the first time on new hardware. Windows XP Home Edition will cost $99 for the upgrade version and $199 for first-time installers. Windows XP Professional will cost $199 for the upgrade version and $299 for first-time installations. If you want to upgrade two or more PCs in a home, Microsoft will let you purchase additional licenses at a small discount of about $8 to $12. You'll get a valid key code--the 25-digit alphanumeric you must supply during the product activation process--for each license. That means you can use one Windows XP installation CD (purchased at full price) to upgrade several PCs. Most users will be able to use the upgrade editions. If you've built your own PC from parts (or if you want to upgrade a Windows 95 machine that meets the minimum hardware requirements) you'd probably have to opt for the new, higher cost installation. And, if you have to upgrade multiple components on an existing PC to meet the recommended system configuration, buying a new PC may be a more cost-effective (and hassle-free) option. System Requirements Both Home Edition and Professional have the same bare minimum requirements: 233-MHz processor, 64MB of RAM, and 1.5GB of available disk space Microsoft recommends at least a 300-MHz processor and 128MB of RAM The recommended specs are especially important if you intend to take advantage of such resource-consuming features as having multiple users or tapping into the music, video, and gaming features. If you like to run multiple applications, especially these memory-intensive ones, you might want to upgrade your memory to at least 256MB of RAM for a better experience. You may need a BIOS upgrade to use some of the hibernation and power-management features, particularly if your BIOS was made before January 1, 2000. Microsoft says systems dating back to the 1999 Christmas holiday season should be able to upgrade without significant problems. Older systems may have some problems. Upgrade Paths Upgrading your current system to Windows XP will preserve all your network and hardware settings, and you shouldn't need to reinstall any applications--with a few exceptions (which are noted in an upgrade advisory downloadable from Microsoft's Web site a few weeks before the OS ships). From Win 98, 98SE, Me: If you're currently running Windows 98, 98SE, or Me, you can upgrade to either Windows XP Home Edition or Professional. From Windows NT 4.0 Workstation or 2000: You can only upgrade to Windows XP Professional if you're running NT or 2000. Microsoft doesn't support upgrading an existing Windows 2000 or NT 4.0 system to the Home Edition. To use Home Edition on such a machine you'd need to do a clean install, manually configure the settings that XP setup missed, and reinstall all your applications. From Win 95: Upgrades from Windows 95 are not supported for either the Home Edition or Professional. Given the system hardware requirements of Windows XP, most systems that are running Windows 95 wouldn't be a good upgrade bet anyway. If you do want to install XP on a system currently running Windows 95, you can perform a clean install. Upgrade Specifics Hardware: The devil is always in the details, and OS upgrades are no exception. After considering the basic system and software requirements, you'll want to check Microsoft's hardware compatibility list to see if your system and all your peripherals are listed. If they are not, check the vendor's Web site to see if XP support will arrive soon. Software: System utilities and antivirus programs are the most likely sources of incompatibilities. Expect to have to replace them with new versions (which may not be free) or to have to download and install patches. For example, Symantec says none of its popular Norton software--AntiVirus, CleanSweep, Internet Security, SystemWorks, or Utilities--is compatible with Windows XP, but new XP-compatible versions will go on sale by the time XP ships. For known issues with software, check this page: http://www.pcpitstop.com/xpready/apps.asp Device drivers: Those written for the Windows 95/98/Me environment often won't run on Windows NT/2000/XP, which means that someone (usually Microsoft or the original vendor) has to write or update the drivers. Microsoft has made sure the drivers are in place for the most popular hardware. However, it may be impossible to get the drivers you need for old hardware that's no longer being made or for hardware from defunct companies. Don't let the upgrade issues scare you off,, at least if you're upgrading from Windows 98/98SE/Me. You can uninstall XP from any of those OSs (as long as you didn't choose to change your file system from FAT32 to NTSF during the upgrade). You cannot, however, roll back an upgrade from NT 4.0 or 2000. (Portions of this article are from, and copyright PC Pitstop, LLC as well as Ziff Davis Media Inc.)

[mairving]

Did that come straight from Microsoft, Reboot? It looks like more of an ad than a review. Most of the tests that I have seen show XtraPricey to run slower than 2000 and ME.

[reboot]

Nope, not from MS. Some is mine, some is from others personal experiences (sic) with it, and some is from "independent" testing.

[RJ]

Most of the tests that I have seen show XtraPricey to run slower than 2000 and ME.

The reviews about WinXP that I've seen show that WinXP is faster than Win2K and ME if you have 128 MB RAM or more. Anyway all review agreed in the point that WinXP does not run slower than the predecessors.

RJ

[Demosthenes]

Originally posted by RJ Anyway all review agreed in the point that WinXP does not run slower than the predecessors.

Well, that is obvious, if it did run slower, that would imply it would be stopped.

Respectfully,

Demosthenes

[archie]

** People reading this thread may also be interested in reading the Win 98 Vs XP thread in the Windows ME/98/95 forum **
It doesn't seem like that long ago when it was announced that XP would be coming out in fall [Oct] ... the time has come. You guys have already mentioned how there is always resistance to a new OS. So true ... I remember when Win98 first came out, still using win95 for several months after the release of the new OS, until I was convinced by reading many of the threads here that it was time to move up. There has been no regrets.
This thread answers a lot of questions yet brings forth new ones ...

I have a feeling that the upgrade version will suit most people. Just run a fresh install of 98, then run XP over top, then install the software.

1-If the upgrade version is purchased, can a clean install still be done as in the past? What would qualify as a previous version? Win98 OK?
2-Is WinXP considered the next step after win2k and is WinME considered the next step after win98 [as in there is no new OS yet after WinME].

[RJ]

2-Is WinXP considered the next step after win2k and is WinME considered the next step after win98 [as in there is no new OS yet after WinME].

WinXP is the successor of both Win2K and WinME, but although there are two versions WinXP professional and WinXP home edition WinXP bases on the Win2K kernel. XP home seems just the pro with just some features less (such as remote desktop, some network capabilities, etc.).
So WinXP home is the successor of WinME (and technically like Win2K). There will never be an OS based on the 9x kernel anymore.

RJ

[reboot]

Archie:
1. Full installs can be done as with all MS OS's using the upgrade CD. Start the install, and when prompted, insert the qualifying product (windows9x) CD.
2. RJ answered this one, XP Home is the successor to the 9x/ME series, and XP Pro is the successor to NT/2K.
The Windows 9x kernel will finally R.I.P.

[troysvihl]

Archie - How do you get a clean install from the upgrade version? Was this somthing that was available when using the 98 upgrade, or can it be done with ME as well?


i have a question related to Archie's questions:

Doesn't the stand-alone version provide a "cleaner" install than the upgrade version? (cleaner in the sense that there are fewer potential problems) And if so, can I assume that this will be true of XP as well? (so that I should just get the stand-alone rather than the upgrade to get optimal results)

I had so much trouble with upgrading ME, that I just ate the cost of the upgrade and bought a complete version of 2k. Others I know that had the complete version of ME didn't have the same problems that I encountered. Although it's quite likely that my problems are entirely unrelated to using ME's upgrade version rather than the stand-alone; i haven't bothered to go back and figure it out since I got 2k. (I tried to the other week, but for some reason I couldn't even get 98 to work for me. After loading my soundcard's programs, the system completly stops working and even safe boot can't get 98 to load properly. It's been so long since I've had 98 installed that I've forgotten how I got it to run before.)

[troysvihl]

lol. you're too quick reboot. thanks for answering one of my questions. i'll have to give old ME a try again the next time i feel like i should reinstall. Maybe I can sidestep the whole sound-card problem entirely by loading ME directly. (I bought the Sims for my girlfriend but I forgot that it wouldn't run on 2k, so i'll have to give it a try soon.)

[archie]

Doesn't the stand-alone version provide a "cleaner" install than the upgrade version?

Troysvihl, was that meant to be: 'Doesn't the full version provide a "cleaner" install than the upgrade version?
As far as the end result, at least the way it's been in the past [and there is no reason do doubt that it wouldn't be the same this time around], the two, full version vs upgrade, are the same if done as a clean install ... except that a prompt will ask for the old CD [there may be a way to bypass it, but I won't get into that here]. It could be debated by some whether it's better or not to do a clean install but IMO, there is no doubt that a new OS should be installed from scratch ... it's a good time to get rid of the extra baggage and I feel the PC will run better.

[cobra]

Been running XP final for awhile now, (thx MS devnet) it's ok, except I immediately changed theme to classic. I keep a dual boot 2k/Xp, still love 2k

[troysvihl]

yeah archie, that's what i meant. thanks for answering my question.

[SARGE]

reboot, that's good info, however I'll be buying another copy of Win98 SE, just in case my original breaks or gets lost. I have 3 pc's running very stable and don't wish to fool with driver upgrades to make 7 modems, 3 different printers and scanners work in Win XP, nor go after versions of ZA and Norton, etc., to make the software work, or try and get my Linksys Network installed on XP. Everything works and I ain't fixing to fix it.

[lil Jimmie]

Great info there Reboot! I have been running XP for quite sometime and I have been very happy with XP thus far. The boot times are awesome and a very stable OS. IMHO it is faster than 98/ME.

[Xayd]

This is NOT renting the OS, you buy it, you own it. It's Microsoft's way of trying to prevent fraud and theft. Can you blame them?

If that's what they think they gotta do, hey, it's their software. That's hardly a reason to condone spyware in your OS, though, and that's what this product activation thing is.

Built in cookie cruncher and firewall, stuff that we all want/like, but usually rely on a (proorly written) 3rd party app to do.

Ummmm, Netscape 6 and Mozilla can filter cookies to your heart's content, ya know, Netscape, the browser company that Microsoft decided to stamp out like so many other software companies a few years ago . And there wouldn't be such a market for software firewalls if it weren't for the blatant insecurities of Win95/98/ME would there? 'Poorly written' in relation to firewalls and such is hardly fair or accurate. Explain to me how ICS is superior to any *nix router alternative, such as the distros that came out of the Linux Router Project, for instance.

It's ultimate draw is it's stability. If Explorer ever crashes, an icon is gone from the taskbar, and Explorer relaunches on it's own.

You can kill and restart explorer to your heart's content in Win2k as well, this isn't new.

Most users will be able to use the upgrade editions. If you've built your own PC from parts (or if you want to upgrade a Windows 95 machine that meets the minimum hardware requirements) you'd probably have to opt for the new, higher cost installation.

Why is that? If someone built their own computer, why would they need to purchase the full version rather than upgrade? This makes no sense, since we all know the upgrade and full versions are no different from each other. This is Microsoft not liking the fact that there are so many illegitimate versions of Windows being run on home-built PCs, and trying to convince those people to pay more for the same.

Under those circumstances, staying with win2K makes the most sense, because it is a proven winner .. it is stable and secure, and the bugs have been mostly patched, there isnt really a reason to jump ship at this moment, not until XP-Pro-SP2 is out.

LOL! So, they mean it isn't worth 299 dollars now if you have Win2k, but it'll be worth 299 dollars about 6 months from now after they fix everything that's broken with the initial release, eh? True Microsoft form in that statement, .

Portions of this article are from, and copyright PC Pitstop, LLC as well as Ziff Davis Media Inc.

Hardly surprising considering Microsoft has paid millions to ZDNet and TechTV for advertising around XP.

[mairving]

Here is some new info on Windows XP from the Blartner Group.

[SARGE]

I'm not a self-appointed cheerleader in the anti-XP faction. I trust nothing past Win98. MS seems alot like Tom Clancy's books. When first started they put out great stuff, but success has made them overweight - they ain't hungry anymore. If someone gave me a free copy of every new OS that came along, I'd still reject it.

Xayd makes valid points. The whole spyware thing turns off most folks. If it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, then it must be a duck.

What chaps my arse is the way the vendors (Dell, Gateway, etc) have to suck up to MS. Hell, I can't buy a new Gateway unless I'm forced to accept XP. Ain't buying one anyway, but it's the idea...

Next, MS will require retinal scans, DNA and pee in a bottle to ensure you're really who you claim to be.

[KoOk]

I dont know what you guys and girls use your computers for but for me its gaming and programming, and although im pretty sure MS Visual Studio will run on XP, im not willing to take a 20fps hit in the most popular games.The NT core usually causes atleast a 20-30 fps performance hit in most games and it will be a long time before any NT OS can beat 9X OS in gaming. I have an amd 1.4Ghz, GeForce 3, with 512 DDR ram and I didnt buy this hardware just so I could run some pretty looking OS and type come code. People see XP run well on their systems and think its great because it starts up fast. Try benchmarking it, anything outside of a text editor will run slower cause the OS needs the majority of your computer to run itself. The stability of 2k/XP comes on a 9X OS if youve got new hardware and can make it work. Im not against XP, if the underlying performance in games was as good as 98/ME id use it myself, but the NT core was originally designed for networks and servers, running graphic intensive games at home is another story, sure you get stability and security, but from what ive seen it has a long way to go before home use is going to be anything more then stability.
So if your a hardcore gamer, which there are many, dual boot XP and ME, or just forget about XP for the time being.
All you text document people, enjoy your stable text editors.

[reboot]

You guys still don't get it do you?
What spyware? PROVE to me that it's sending anything personal on my computer to anywhere else, let alone MS.
Give me a break, then go READ the stuff, THEN make an informed argument.
The WPA is simply an activation code given to you from MS so you can use the software. You've got 30 days to try things out before you must activate it, or it stops working. It doesn't go away, it doesn't phone MS and tell them your name, address, and phone number, and that you're using it past the 30 day mark.
I'll say no more on this topic, as it's beating a dead horse.

Netscape (AOL crap, with a very flaky java engine) can either "get with the program" and start producing a stable, reliable browser, or sink into the depths of AOh3ll.

Mozilla...now there's a browser everyone can live with! (Note that all versions of IE from 3.2 up are all based on the Mozilla engine!!!!)

I didn't say "kill and restart", I said CRASH, and this goes for any app in the taskbar, if it crashes (in Win98 it will take explorer out with it, as well as most icons in the system tray) it will restart, and you don't lose the icons.

Most users will be able to use the upgrade editions. If you've built your own PC from parts (or if you want to upgrade a Windows 95 machine that meets the minimum hardware requirements) you'd probably have to opt for the new, higher cost installation.

Sorry folks, a misquote...should read:

Most users will be able to use the upgrade editions. If you've built your own PC from parts (or if you want to upgrade a Windows 95 machine that meets the minimum hardware requirements) you'd probably NOT have to opt for the new, higher cost installation.

Yes, we all are aware of MS's huge advertising budget. The portions I used from ZD and others are factual statements, not opinions. The opinions are mine. Period.

KoOk, who told you that you'd take a 20fps hit with XP? Time to do some more research...

Try benchmarking it, anything outside of a text editor will run slower cause the OS needs the majority of your computer to run itself.

I have benchmarked it. It loads faster, it runs applications faster, it uses RAM more efficiently, it buffers my (cheap) video better, and I have MORE fps, not less, in most graphic intensive apps. Go back to the classic desktop, turn off the un-needed services, (go ahead, tell me you didn't have to tweak win9x to run stable) and it will (probably) smoke most stable win9x systems.
Dual boot if that's your thing, but personally, I wouldn't touch Windows ME on ANY hardware that I own/manage, EVER!, and yes, I do own, and have run ME on multiple machines, and benchmarked it.

Sarge, I know how you feel about Gateway et al, and I agree. It's being shoved down people's throats (not quite like ME was, but...).

[Computer Hobbyist]

There is no doubt that XP is a very good operating system. It might even be the best desktop OS ever produced, but I have yet to see any compelling reason to buy it. When Windows 95 came out, it was so much better than Win 3.1 and ran application software Win 3.1 or Win 3.11 couldn't even begin to run that purchasing it was a no brainer. Win 98 was the bug fix for Win 95 and Win 98SE was the bug fix for Win 98. My migration to both took longer. I don't see WindowsXP being much more than an incremental upgrade. This isn't 1995.

CH

[KoOk]

I have every MS OS put out.

I have benchmarked them all.

WPA is garbage its all ready been totally removed from my version and before that, the 30 day activation did nothing.

Who would buy a computer from Dell, Compaq, or Hewlett unless your a lazy bum who talks computer BS but really doesnt know anything about computers
(On the go business types with no time excluded). Yes these companies and others shove the newest OS down your throat, thats because computer "know it alls" like to see the "latest and greatest" so why would they offer old OS's?

Im tired of hearing **it talk from people who fire up a game once a week, benchmark Doom on their tnt card and think they are hardcore gamers that know it all.
(Note: Max Payne and Commandos 2 do not offically support XP, both were released within 6 months of XP coming out, figure that one out if XP is so great with games, two large developers didnt even touch it.)

To REBOOT: I dont know what kind of "graphic intensive apps" you run on your "(cheap) video" whatever, but im talking about people who use their computer like its a video game console.
XP has a ways to go, and I said nothing about XP being bad with ram or starting up fast and running desktop apps fast, I know you probably think you need all your ram for those "graphic intensive" desktop apps to start up fast, and save you valuable nano seconds so you can get back to your text, so I don't know why you decided to cut and paste those little facts out of whatever tech editorial youve been reading, but I already knew that.

[Demosthenes]

Well, not that I am entering the battle, but I am expecting XP under the tree this winter. I swear, if I see one more illegal operation, blue screen, etc, I will bash my head in. I think the reason people (not normal ones, mind you, but the types that frequent these boards) hate MS products is because they are not aimed toward them. Believe it or not, the builders, hobbyists, tweakers, etc, are not a majority. The ironic thing is, there would be a whole lot fewer builders, hobbyists, tweakers, etc, if Windows never came out. Let us face the fact that Windows gave the PC to the people. Not a select few people, but everyone. And that is what XP is meant to do: To allow everyone equal opportunity to learn computing. If you have a problem with this, then I am speechless.

As for "**it talk from people who fire up a game once a week, benchmark Doom on their tnt card and think they are hardcore gamers that know it all." and "lazy bums who talks computer BS but really doesnt know anything about computers". I am sick and tired of comments that put those people down. I am tired of people assuming superiority because they wield a mouse better or because they know the secrets to "Windows," ohhhh like that is a difficult OS to figure out. We have all been there. Some of us aspire to higher ranks, and some of us write the programs that those who aspire to higher ranks use. And the compilers and such that the writers use are written by someone else. There is always someone smarter than you. That has been a hard thing for me to accept, but when you become the intellectual minority and meet those smarter people, who you always thought of as a statistic, the world becomes a very different place. Final word: You do not have to speak (or type) with an edge to get a point across. An edge only makes people resist all the more.

Anyway, enough ranting, I run a high-end AMD system. Even if Windows XP yields a lower FPS rating, then that does not bother me. I already have a GeForce3 and my eyes cannot distinguish between 80 and 60 FPS. I do not think anyone knows the "facts," just altered personal biases based off others opinions. I cannot wait to see if anyone responds to this one.

Respectfully,

Demosthenes

[reboot]

KoOk, thanks for informing us that you know how to hack the 30 day activation. If you want a game console, why not buy one? If you want a computer, fine, if you want it to be a multi-use (gaming and computing, and (insert other here)) then build it as such. Next, tell me that XP won't fit your needs. Fine, I agree, some of the higher end games (and the lower end too) won't run on XP "out of the box". They will. The game people will have to, if they want to keep up sales. Even I still multi-boot (gasp) with Windows98 (gasp) not SE (gasp), as well as a couple of "alternative" OS's (gasp).

As for "**it talk from people who fire up a game once a week, benchmark Doom on their tnt card and think they are hardcore gamers that know it all." and "lazy bums who talks computer BS but really doesnt know anything about computers". I am sick and tired of comments that put those people down. I am tired of people assuming superiority because they wield a mouse better or because they know the secrets to "Windows

Agreed. I may know a little more than some, and try to pass that knowledge on via BBS's like this one. Opinions are always welcome, flaming is not. If you disagree with something I've said, present a logical argument, and I'll discuss it until the cows come home. Flame me, and you'll never get one more keystroke from me, ever.

XP is a users OS, designed for everyone, and as simple or complex as YOU want it to be. This is a first, especially for MS, although some Linux distros have been trying to get this point across for awhile. It will suit (probably) more than 90% of the buying public, and will work spendidly for about the same number. When hardware manufacturer's catch up with the real world, and start producing quality controlled hardware, even more people will be happy to run it. (Don't get me started on PC Chips, Compaq, PCTel, etc.) Tell me the same about Windows ME?
Like ANY other operating system this side of DOS, quality hardware makes all the difference.

Demosthenes, I hope Santa is good to you, and you get to enjoy a truly stable Microsoft OS.

[Blankman]

Well I for one would like to say thanks to Reboot. He gave me more fair info in one post than I've found on the web in two weeks. And it came in a well done condensed version. Here's to Reboot...PROST!~

Oh, and by the way, I've always been curios to know where Kelowna is. I've been to Trail and that was a beautiful drive. Any chance we could get an exterior pic posted of the mountains?

[reboot]

I've got a virtual tour and a whole slew of shots. I'll post them tomorrow.

[KoOk]

Actually I have every console thats been released to date, with Gamecube and Xbox on preorder.
I use my computer for many things, games being a major one.
My point is on new games and most old 3D games you will take a 15% performance hit on XP and 2k, if you dont believe it, fine, go on thinking XP runs games faster, Im not going to loose any sleep if I dont get another keystroke from you.
I just made my first post to inform gamers that it isnt as good 9X, thats all, and I did say it has a long ways to go. I know manufacturers havent caught up yet, they havent had time. But you decided to use you infinite knowledge of the computer world to correct everyone in the thread, consequently, drawing my list of corrections and facts. Thats all.

As for your forum etiquette, we are making these posts in general discussion area so I believe arguing and correcting is allowed. If you have all the answers dont ask others what they think by starting a thread. If you want to whine about someone making corrections find a forum admin that might care, I dont.

[SARGE]

'boot, you did an excellent job of presenting the case for XP. I'd trust your opinion over most published reviews, as you do hands-on testing and have nothing to gain by pumping up XP. Can't put my finger on it exactly, but I feel uncomfortable about XP. I believe it's the fretting about getting drivers that makes me balk. Right now, with 3 pc's humming along (and wifey happy), I don't need problemos

[mc2phat]

I see what you mean sarge, but it was the opposite for me. I've run win2k for awhile now; The Wife didn't want to switch from Windows98. I was patient on this one, every four or five months when I had to reformat & reload her OS, I'd comment on how stable win2k Pro on my machine is compared to her Win98, and upon the last hard-core crash I had her convinced. Her Win98 was very difficult to keep running, as she was constantly downloading and installing this or that, has 97 things running in the background, and so on. She uses HER computer HER way, and doesn't want me to touch it. I'd sneak on and maintain it for her; Windows 98 just couldn't handle her usage.

To make a stupid story short, she has w2k now and is incredibly happy with it. Couldn't get CallWave answering machine to run properly, but oh well. Like you it'll be a cold day when I go to XP. w2k handles everything she can possibly throw at it with aplomb, and I pretty much have it figured out and don't wish to start over just yet.

-phfat

[mairving]

Originally posted by reboot I've got a virtual tour and a whole slew of shots. I'll post them tomorrow.

Reboot, I thought that we had already given you quite a slew of shots already.