Windows XP inquiry and such

[Dodge7]

Just a few technical questions about XP....if anyyone could help? Forgive me for the stupid ones, please.

Do you all find XP as stable as Win 2000?

What is the command line langauge that XP runs? To me it looks like a limited version of DOS. Is there a more in depth command line language available?

I have heard claims that XP still runs DOS at the lower levels [BIOS or maybe Disk Operations] any truth to that?

Finally, if I switched from 98SE to XP on the same machine [clean install] and made sure there was enough memory, would XP run about the same speed?

Thanks in advance for help.

[TwoRails]

Hi Dodge7,

I can share a liitle of my experiences with my very recent Win 98.2 to XP Pro upgrate:

1) Never used 2K, so I can't compare on that, but it does so far (after a month or so) seem more stable than Win 98.2, but it's not as stable as most have claimed. For example, when trying to use my 98.2 "atomic" clock setter, it would lock up XP every time. (Then I discovered XP has a built in clock setter.) But, power loss / improper shut down recovery seems much better, but I understand that is due to NTFS and not necessarily due to XP.

2) The command line is similar to DOS, and don't know if it has it's own "special" name other than "command line."

3) Don't know.

4) I'm still running only 512MB memory, and XP is running fine, but doesn't seem to be as fast as 98.2. I don't have (yet) as much loaded on the XP as my 98.2 system, and it takes longer to bootup and shut down for one example. (and, yes, I've turned off all the things I could find in various tips-n-tricks type articles.)

Stuff like Defrag is painfully slow by comparison. Windows Explorer takes longer to show the directory tree, and the like. I have not loaded my home movie stuff yet, so the big test to me, which is analog video capture, has yet to be run.

HTH

TwoRails

PS: I should mention, however, that I am overall very pleased with XP Pro. I like it so much, in fact, that I picked up a copy of XP Home yesterday to convert (fresh install) my wife's computer from Win 98.2. There are numerious features that she will love. I'm even strongly considering updating my work shed system, too.

[lil Jimmie]

While XP using NTFS may not be as fast it is by far more stable that 98/ME. Instead of a complete crash and reboot like 98/ME most often the app will crash back to the desktop. Personally I find it to be just as stable as 2000 with greater hardware and software support.

If XP is taking longer than 98 to boot then I would think something is wrong somewhere.

Clean installs offer less hassle and are recommended over upgrades from 98/ME The only upgrades that seem to have the least amount of trouble are Win 2K to XP.

I prefer Diskeeper or even Diskeeper lite over the built in defragmenter.

[Dodge7]

Thanks for the responses.

I have Window 98 SE and have had good luck there. Occasionally a program [mostly IE 6] crashes, that is only once in a few weeks, and I just close the program and go on, no reboot required. I go months between system crashes. However, I run pretty standard programs.

I do have the Atomic clock sync program. That is what I worrry about, switching and finding my favorite 3rd party programs don't work.

Win 2000 was incredibly stable, but I do remember defrag took forever. Much quicker with Win 98. And Win 98 is quick for me all around.

Seemed to me there was an extended command line langauge for XP. I can't remember what it was or how to install. As far as still running DOS, is there a DOS folder?

Maybe XP home is a little more streamlined and faster?

[erucader]

No, XP has nothing to do with DOS. It has a command line emulator but is not based off dos like win 9x.

[lil Jimmie]

Try start> run and type "command" for fun.

[TwoRails]

Originally posted by Dodge7 I do have the Atomic clock sync program. That is what I worrry about, switching and finding my favorite 3rd party programs don't work.

That was / is my major concern, too. But so far, eveything is running fine, with few exceptions (like the clock one). One reason I'm "liking" XP is that I don't have torun a lot of my older programs (again, like the clock one).

But, I haven't installed everything I want / had, either. And, I haven't tried running of my old favorite DOS games, either.

TwoRails

[Dodge7]

Yeah, I have a number of the old 80s Arcade games, I think many run in Windows, a few in DOS. And I still mess with other DOS program like QBASIC. I would like to still run those. Would be nice to know if they still work.

I heard XP is nice in they included a lot of popular thrid party programs.

I may get a second computer with XP and leave this alone.. just in case

[TwoRails]

BASIC games haven't run on systems for a long time, as there wasn't any timing routines in them and they would run faster then you could see them.

Funny, I was going to do the opposite, and build a "DOS" box from my spare parts

The way I set this machine up was to get a harddrive tray and stuck it into an open drive bay. When I wanted to "use" my computer, I stuck in my Win 98.2 HD. When I wanted to build my "new" system, I stuck the XP HD in! Worked very nicely

TwoRails

[Dodge7]

I can run the DOS games fine on this system. I do have a game that runs way to fast, yet it appears to be written for Windows, and isn't that old. I don't have Qbaisic games, I just write various test programs from time to time. Would probably still work with XP.

Your way of swapping drives would work.... I had an old 486 I should have kept that.... worked good for DOS applications. However, since I have this 98 machine that also does fine with DOS, I thought I would buy a second computer.Then I could have this one for "experiments", running emulators, DOS, etc. I do too much of that already, considering this is my primary computer.

[Dodge7]

Then again I could get one of the cheap White box computers, buildtbuy a guy named Joe or Steve or Dave, at one of those corner stores... for $239

I meant to say, one reason I was conisidering XP is that it appears the connnection program is much improved over Win 9x. Do you find that to be true?

I hate having to make connection adjustments. The Win 9x layout isn't the most logical in many ways.

[TwoRails]

Yes, I do. In fact, that was my whole motivation to try XP: I was getting tired of constant connection trouble with my old system. Everything else ran fine (DOS games, utilities, and so on). I figured that it was time for either a fresh install of Win 98.2, but I figured I'd use the copy of XP Pro I've had laying around. With my two drive system of "building" it, I figured I couldn't really lose out. (my copy of XP is pre-SP1 is how old it is !! LOL )

[bailey]

xp has solved any and all my computing complaints

[LawyerRon]

Both XP and W2K are very nice OS's IMO. I run XP Pro which seems to have a few more handy features.

[Dodge7]

Good going on the connection problems. That would be a major plus for me.

Although, the problem I had turned out to be Earthlink not allowing over 33k. I've since switched ISPs and have been quite happy. Still, the way connection panels have been layed out on Windows 98 is not intuitive. I spend a lot of time fighting with the settings.

Sounds like most people have been happy with XP. I remember hearing that Gates was on a Jihad about getting Windows to be more intiutive and such, a few years previous to XP.

P.S. As far as Atomic Clock Sync not running, I just got IE 6 and now Atomic Clock Sync doesn't work.

......................................................................
System: a White box, unknown chips and parts, built by a guy named Steve Tom or Dave depending when I visited the place

[crjdriver]

I have use both win2k [my personal favorite] and xp. Both are very good os. XP is a little more user friendly than win2k. I just do not like the cartoon look of xp even in classic view it is still too cute looking for me.

You will probably find that xp will run a wider range of apps / games than win2k will. XP has the system restore feature which can at times be nice to have. Win2k does not have this feature.

[Dodge7]

Yeah, XP does have a little of the Win 3.1 Playschool cartoon look. I think they feel that makes it looks a little more friendly.
I perfer the 9x appearance.

Still, almost all the people I talk to like XP. My friend is about to buy a computer. She was considering Win 2000 and I said she probably should still go with XP. Sounds like I made the right choice.

I am still curious, does anyone know if there is a more extensive command language?

Has anyone tested the mulittask capability of XP? Try to see how much runs smoothly?

Thanks for the experiences...
............................................................................
Computer: White box, made by Steve, Tom, or Dave. Componets have unknown lables. 128 RAM... wait 120 RAM, rest goes to video card. Weak sound card... er, there isn't a sound card....

[Dodge7]

The choice is made... MS isn't going to maintain Win 98 anymore I heard. wow.

...............................................................................
Computer: White box, made by Steve, Tom, Kurt or Dave. Componets have unknown lables. 128 RAM... wait 120 RAM, rest goes to video card. Weak sound card... er, there isn't a sound card....

[TwoRails]

I've been hearing that rumor for a while... so... it's finally happened, eh?

Funny, I just came in from my little work shed. My project for the evening was some maintenance on my wife's computer, and to install XP home on the new hard drive I stuck it there! I think she'll love it. And, I hope it will cure some of the email problems she's been having recently.

[raftero]

i have xp-pro on an intel and w2k pro on an AMD computer,i don't see any difference in stability,both are very good,much beter than w98 in my opinion.i like xp better because it accepts software that w2k refuses,other than that (with xp set on classic)i see very little difference.altho i do like the systems restore,it saved me one time when i made a boo boo.

[Dodge7]

Two....That is one thing, I haven't heard any complaints that XP was difficult to adapt to

rafe... That is my one concern about Win 2000, compatibility, since it was meant for office work, and not as a home system. I could see problems with compatibility. I am sure XP is designed more for the home.... That is way I was a little concerned about how stable and such the system was. However, doesn't seem to be an issue.

I have heard a few stories on the development of the 9x OS. [for one thing the project was running late and they thought it might get called Win 96]. Anyway, I heard the initial OS they developed had better multitask capability then what was eventually released. Evidently, to make the OS more compatible, MS had to sacrifice reliability and mulitask.
..........................................................................
computer: A Whitebox built by Steve Tom or Dave. Creates so much RFI TV reception is affected... sound card was quite

[Dodge7]

Anyone know this.... if I created a partition on my HD, then installed XP, could XP access files on the Windows 98 side? And run them possibly? Just an idea of having 98 in just in case.
...........................................................
computer: A Whitebox built by Steve Tom or Dave. Creates so much RFI TV reception is affected... sound card was... quiet

[DUSTIN]

you could dual boot both. you could run windows xp and windows 98 until you got comfortable. just a thought?

[Dodge7]

Yeah, I was considering that. I want to do a clean install with XP, yet I don't want to mess with the 98 system.

What I don't understand about dual booting is: do I need to have data files for each OS or can either OS access the data files I already have for Win 98? I was considering installing XP on a second partition then moving the data files over there from the Win 98 side.

Wait a second. I forgot Two Rails idea. I can just get a second HD and have that as my XP system.

Then again, maybe I should just get a second computer....

hmmm.... have to check
...............................................................................
computer: A Whitebox built by Steve Tom or Dave. Creates so much RFI TV reception is affected... sound card was... quiet

[Panama Red]

I know where yer at Dodge. I transitioned from 98se to XP Home a few months ago. Took some getting used to, but now I love it. I run a dual boot machine with 98se on a second hard drive. Just like having two comps. Also allows me to try different tweaks on each system idependent of each other. I keep finding ways to speed things up without oc'ing. 98se running on 1Gb of ram with Reboot's page file suggestions really flys! Nothing like my old Gateway 500 P3!!

[Dodge7]

Sound good Panama. Did you notice a speed increase when you switched to XP?

All this encouragement has made me decide to go ahead. I am getting the XP disk in a week or so. The only decision is whether to go with a second HD or build a second computer. The info on this site has gotten me interested in building my computer. Would be cool, and I would likely enjoy doing so.

Later
...................................................................................
computer: A Whitebox built by Steve Tom or Dave. Creates so much RFI TV reception is affected... sound card was... quiet

[TwoRails]

Another advantage of the HD drive bay tray is that, if needed, you simply pull out the drive(s) and hide / lock them up with ease.

In fact, that was my original main reason for getting them in the first place: I had company for an extended period that like to mischieviously "mess with" my systems / settings and would really mess things up. (very long story... )

[Dodge7]

You know, that is a good point. Especially, if you have roomates. Even if you trust them, who knows about their relatives and friends. A removable HD would be ideal.

The other idea I thought of would be to have a solid cover that you could place over your computer. The computer would sit on the base part, and you would just lock down the top part. That would keep the gremlins away... as such.

..................................................................................
Computer: a Whitebox built by Tom, Tim Steve, Dave, whoever was at the shop that times. Creates engough RFI to drown out AM close.

[TwoRails]

Not a bad idea, Dodge7! Unfortunately, it would not work in my particular case, as 2 of 3 of my running systems are sitting tightly under a shelf above. So, to remove or install the cover, I'd have to disconnect / reconnect all the wiring, and pull out the computer itself, to install / remove the cover. But, I wish I could do that as it would have been a simpler, cheaper way of "securing" easy access...

[Dodge7]

hmmmm... would a password have worked for your case?

I had the idea for the "computer case" for awhile, I have to think that others thought of it, and it exists already. I think there was a simplier soution, a panel that fits on the front of the computer enclousre, keeps people from turning it on or accessing the drives, power, reset, and the internal case.


...................................................................

Computer: A Whitebox by Whiteheart corp built by Tim, Tom, Steve, Dave, or who was at the shop that time. Enought RFI to destroy AM