Difference b/w WinXP and Win98

[ITlover]

Hello

Can anyone list down the main differences betweem win98 and winxp, actually I am using win98 on P4 but some of my friends are recommending me to replace it with winxp.

So I would like to get detail information regarding the differences between these 2 operating systems in terms of performance and efficiency.

Regards,

[HyperTF]

Stability does it for me and the greater control I seem to have and information at my fingertips...

Also it thrives on the NTFS file system so more features available such as more efficient use of hard drive storage, permissions, encryption and compression of files and folders

Things seem to run faster in general.

Friendlier user interface

Better system management tools.

And you will find that software is going to be aimed more towards XP then anything.

I was difficult to convince to change over, mainly because I have always said, if it aint broke, don't fix it... but in this case I am glad I did upgrade.

There is more stuff, I don't want to steal the show

[bailey]

man, your asking a lot:
your wanting to compare peaches and lemons.
they are two completely differant operateing systems, and there is no way to compare them
w98 is based on dos kinda
and xp is based on nt
the nt base is one of the most secure and stable operating systems there is.
xp also is normaly used in the ntfs format where dos is used in the fat format.
and that is just the beginning of all the differances.

I suggest that you listen to your friends and think about useing xp.

mind you there is nothing wrong with w98se, I am dual booting with it also, but after useing xp for a while, I very reaely use w98 anymore.
more and more software is written for xp nowadays and it has a much greater driver data base, and more devices only have drivers for xp,
so the bottom line is, sooner or later you will be going to xp anyway. I'd bet on that.
with the system you now have will run fine with xp, you could dual boot and have the best of both systems, and also will let you learn it while still having w98 to fall back on when you feel the need to

[HyperTF]

Well said Bailey...

Hey if you wait too much longer Longhorn will come out... the new baby for Microsoft with its flashy 3D look! I am rubbing my hands with glee! Better get tuned up with XP... don't get left behind!

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_alpha.asp

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...rn_4051_01.asp

[ITlover]

Hello everybody

I have not used Winxp ,but I do know little bit about it. One of the greatest feature of WinXp is that it has system restore option and I agree with bailey it has a much larger driver database as compared to win98.

Is it true that the speed of internet is much fast on winxp as compared to win98?

Regards

[mrmister1]

As bailey said, they are based on two entirely different kernels. XP has a new GUI and is much more user oriented.

[rfleming]

is there a link to the beta versions of longhorn?

[jimmyrules712]

unless you dont have enough RAM or harddrive space to support it well, winows xp is the way to gowithout a doubt.

[mb26]

' in terms of performance and efficiency.' 98 (is it SE u have?) wins hands down. XP uses more ram and CPU power u can't argue with that.

'Things seem to run faster in general.' well u may percieve them to, but in reality they aren't. win98 is more efficient. it may be that ur hardware is fast enough that the differences aren't noticeable..

XP, looks nicer.
it has NTFS, but i am yet to be convinced of its advantages (i am open minded but no one has told me why it is meant to be more stable). it is slower than fat32 however.
if u have kids/siblings who u dont want to access ur files (and they aren't advanced PC users) then u can stop them with NTFS.
one of the very few actual program-running differences is that XP can run transparent things, to me that wore off pretty quickly.
currently 98se is still supported by the vast majority of hardware. the question perhaps is, will this hardware and software support last until longhorn is released?
on the software side of things i'd say yes probably (other than the latest MS software perhaps*). MS announced they were extending support for 98 until 2006 (?), to prevent the non-western world from running to linux in droves. on the hardware side, perhaps, but there may be one item which u add that doesn't, so it would depend perhaps on how much u upgrade things and how obscure they are. if u have any older hardware, then XP might not support it, which may also be a consideration.
system restore is ok, but i can't say its been much of a lifesaver- if anything minor goes wrong, i can fix it myself, and on the occasions when major things have messed up, it hasn't worked. and it uses up a large section of HDD space (again if u have plenty to spare it doesn't matter as much perhaps).
i found networking and stuff harder to install with XP, its always trying to interfere and control things itself. but on the up side hiding inactive system tray icons is a nice touch. and it is *much* more insecure, u must install firewall (XP has its own) anti-vir and i'd strongly suggest spyware blaster, and IMO firefox. preferably before going online.

XP does more than 98 (*) but, there are 3rd party solutions u can use with 98 which (the best of) are, much better in every field, and u may find yourself switching to them with XP anyway.

currently, i'd say there was no huge incentive for u to go out and spend $90 or so if thats what u are planning, until u need to; you could well sit it out until longhorn is avaiable.

but its up to u. if i were picking one or the other, same price on a new pc, despite not being that much better, and knowing its not as efficient, i'd probably pick XP- just because its 'newer' and 'prettier', and its not going to bring a new computer to its knees. but if i had 98se installed and it was a question of a new install and paying $90 (with longhorn on the horizon) i'm not so sure.
theres no compelling reason either way IMO. if u have FE perhaps i'd go XP (?).

-------

'is there a link to the beta versions of longhorn?'
it doesn't do anything yet, except look different. (and clog up ur system) and no, 'joe nobodys' can't get it.

i really hope that longhorn fixes windows long running problems, rather than just making a tarted up version of XP.. like total instability when a CD drive can't read a CD, and unresponsiveness when a program crashes.. being linux-stable would be nice too.
and the ability to look nice on both low-resolution and very high res screens, without either getting lost, or not fitting, in either case. (high-res icons etc)

[LocoCoyote]

I am somewhat amused to hear of how wonderful the driver database is for XP.....Ever try to run an older printer or scanner under XP? you know the ones I am talking about..those with..GASP..16 bit drivers. You will find it to be a big nogo!

If I were to have to choose between the two Windoze versions (SHUDDER) I would choose XP. It is more stable than 9x (though less stable than Linux). Of course, here in the computing world..newer is usally better.

As for LOnghorn fixing Windows long standing problems......don't bet on it.
The problem with Windows is that it is designed to be super easy to use and to do everything for everyone. A tall order. The other problem is that so long as Micro$oft keeps it's source code propritory, there will be only a relativly small number of programers looking at and fixing the code.

my 2 cents

[HyperTF]

Ahh did you hear that the big giant seems to be only just recently opening it's doors now to open sourcing... they have crack teams of people managing it, from what I read it is in an attempt to get help outside of their 57,000 or so employee knowledge base, it seems they are finally might be starting to listen and accept that they are not altogether winning the battle!

Longhorn? and when is that due? I hear they have pushed back the release date again.

[Redfallon]

Originally Posted by mb26 and it is *much* more insecure, u must install firewall (XP has its own) anti-vir and i'd strongly suggest spyware blaster, and IMO firefox. preferably before going online.

I'd have to disagree here, XP is more secure than 98se, IMHO. And firewall, A-V and some type of spyware control/removal software(s) is needed on virtually any PC online today, especially any of the Windows flavours!

[mb26]

"I am somewhat amused to hear of how wonderful the driver database is for XP.....Ever try to run an older printer or scanner under XP? you know the ones I am talking about..those with..GASP..16 bit drivers. You will find it to be a big nogo! "
a-hem... "if u have any older hardware, then XP might not support it," but yes everyone else ignored this, however with a p4 system i doubt its going to be a problem, unless as i said u/he has any specific old hardware.

@redfallon.. well.. i run 98se (w/98 lite, and firefox), with only spyware blaster as protection, i'm pretty sure the hardware firewall (on router) is turned off (yea i know i should get it sorted). no resident AV (ok i really should sort that out too i know)
it runs several hours a day connected to broadband internet and gets *nothing*. i have spyware and adaware but they verryy rarely pick up anything but cookies.
and, last time i installed XP, within a couple of hours of being on it had mydoom (IIRC) or something terrible like that.
admittedly without spyware blaster i'd get a lot of browser hijacks and the like, but not serious stuff like mydoom. dont think u'd want to turn ur firewall and AV off with XP for very long. (w/ ur internet connection on atleast )
and, yes it was 'original' XP and some improvements have been made w/ the SPs and such, but it still has more security holes than 98se surely. i mean u can fix it (XP) up so its plenty secure enough if u know what ur doing.and new holes in XP are always being found- and take a long time for MS to fix, whereas hackers and the like dont really focus on 98se as its less common.. so problems have been ironed out

"Longhorn? and when is that due? I hear they have pushed back the release date again."
2006 is the most specific we have so far AFAIK.

'As for LOnghorn fixing Windows long standing problems......don't bet on it.'
i was dreaming ok, but i dont see how stopping CPU useage to go to 100% when trying to read a broken CD, or when an app fails, stuff like that, wouldn't help a 'noob'. IMO they need to start from scratch, whilst keeping compatible with x86 software. (not dissing the hell out of windows, but we really shouldn't settle for anything less than 100% stable and secure IMO. its a big task, but then MS have the biggest pile of money on earth, so its def possible if they wanted it enough.)

'here in the computing world..newer is usally better."
have to agree that is the prevailing attitude, but it depends on what criteria ur working to.
old is nearly always more efficient, more simple and orientated towards doing a specific job- which it does well and fully, and new is nearly always more tarted up, a lot more out-there features; trying to do-everything, not usually as well as an app made for that task. (=good for noobs)

word 97 vs word XP /200X
winamp 2.x vs 5.x
Window media player 6.4 vs WMP 10
windows 98se vs Windows XP

i think these apps illustrate the differences between old and new pretty well.