Daniel, I like the
'Of course, except for the facts, are IMHO.' My main working system is a 950Mhz athlon usually running w2K on 512Mb memory 4 caddy'd drives switched for whatever systems drives/data/OS I am working on/backing up etc. Fairly stable ( when not running Symantec Ghost9 ) Problems with DVD facilities like InCD and other manufacturer's equivalent - I have to make sure that only 1 such facility is running at any time. I was hoping that there would be a new OS released before W2K support went, but it looks as if I will have to consider an interim move to XP or 2003 - more expense - and pain as the 2K system does not need registering/activating whatever the hardware changes are When I do change - the question will be what applications stop working under the new OS, whichever that will be JimB. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 4:01 AM Subject: Re: Which is more stable Win98, SE or ME? > I use W98SE (with all updates) on my office system (for app reasons and do > not need NT kernel or the slow down) and only use high end apps and do not > install/uninstall crappy apps (especially from net sites). My system is > extremely stable. Can not remember my last BSOD. Very few (once a week at > most.) other errors and/or lock ups and most of those are caused by me. Last > clean install was 2-3 years ago. > > Of course I am using the highest quality components built by Twin*.*Star <G> > > BTW IMHO, ME should be removed from every system in the world and thrown > into the dumpster. Every client with stability/error problems with ME on the > system, I change to W98SE. > > I would never install any NT kernel O/S on an older (CPU) system because the > overhead will definitely slow it down even with double the memory. > > Of course, except for the facts, are IMHO. > > Daniel Wysocki > Twin*.*Computers > Fast Reliable Wallet-Friendly > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "MARC SIMS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > No flavor of Windows 98 is stable and neither is ME. If you want a stable OS > either consider > the options Windows NT 4 Workstation, 2000 or XP and yes they do take more > memory and cpu > power to run but once you upgrade your memory and cpu or get a slightly more > powerful laptop > the benefits of running a flavor of NT, 2000 or XP is well worth the > investment in stability and > dependability. > > -- > ---------------------------------------- > ALL messages to the list MUST include a descriptive subject. > To Change your email Address for this list, send the following message: > CHANGE WIN-HOME your_old_address your_new_address > to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Note carefully that both old and new addresses are required. > > -- ---------------------------------------- WIN-HOME Archives: http://PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM/archives/WIN-HOME.html Contact the List Owner about problems: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unofficial Win-Home List Members Profiles Page http://winhome.wavijo.com/
