Windows XP or "Longhorn"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul Maskell
  • Start date Start date
P

Paul Maskell

Hello,

I'm planning to build myself a new PC soon and wondered if I should upgrade now and use Windows XP
or wait until "Longhorn" is released? (which is about two years away).

At the moment I'm using Windows ME, and it's quite unstable. It, (or IE) keeps giving me "error messages"
and frequently hangs. So I thought "SOD IT, Get a new PC"!!

I guess I'm asking "Just how much better is Windows XP from Windows ME"?
What are the good and bad things about Windows XP?

Thanks for all advice.
 
Paul Maskell said:
Hello,

I'm planning to build myself a new PC soon and wondered if I should upgrade now and use Windows XP
or wait until "Longhorn" is released? (which is about two years away).

At the moment I'm using Windows ME, and it's quite unstable. It, (or IE)
keeps giving me "error messages"
and frequently hangs. So I thought "SOD IT, Get a new PC"!!

I guess I'm asking "Just how much better is Windows XP from Windows ME"?
What are the good and bad things about Windows XP?

Thanks for all advice.
XP is a considerably more stable OS than winME
i'd go for it now as Longhorn will be a while yet before it comes out

you didn't mention what your present machine is...
but with enough RAM it may run XP
 
XP is a considerably more stable OS than winME
i'd go for it now as Longhorn will be a while yet before it comes out

you didn't mention what your present machine is...
but with enough RAM it may run XP

I second that motion. Double your current RAM and install XP on a freshly
formatted disk. You will like it a lot more than Windows ME. -Dave
 
I have been using xp -home and it is very stable. Many people might
suggest the pro version depending on your needs. I upgraded from w98 btw.
 
I second that motion. Double your current RAM and install XP on a freshly
formatted disk. You will like it a lot more than Windows ME. -Dave

Although you can run XP with as little as 128 megs of RAM

going to 256megs or more is a great idea...

even a 450mhz machine will work (as an experiment i loaded it on a p-233
and it was slow
but still useable)

and yes...definately to a clean install by formattting the drive
you can do so from the installtion
 
">
I'm planning to build myself a new PC soon and wondered if I should upgrade now and use Windows XP
or wait until "Longhorn" is released? (which is about two years away).

At the moment I'm using Windows ME, and it's quite unstable. It, (or IE)
keeps giving me "error messages"
and frequently hangs. So I thought "SOD IT, Get a new PC"!!

Alternatively do a Windows update to internet explorer... ME was never that
stable without it. Or if you are happy with the current OS look and speed
(XP will be slower on anything around 1Ghz or less (broadly speaking)...
however it is possible to speed it up) then revert back to 98SE a much more
stable system.

Steve
 
Paul said:
Hello,

I'm planning to build myself a new PC soon and wondered if I should upgrade now and use Windows XP
or wait until "Longhorn" is released? (which is about two years away).

At the moment I'm using Windows ME, and it's quite unstable. It, (or IE) keeps giving me "error messages"
and frequently hangs. So I thought "SOD IT, Get a new PC"!!

I guess I'm asking "Just how much better is Windows XP from Windows ME"?
What are the good and bad things about Windows XP?

Thanks for all advice.

XP is reportedly much more stable than ME. I've never used either though.

What about using a different browser e.g Mozilla?
 
Hello,

I'm planning to build myself a new PC soon and wondered if I should upgrade now and use Windows XP
or wait until "Longhorn" is released? (which is about two years away).

At the moment I'm using Windows ME, and it's quite unstable. It, (or IE) keeps giving me "error messages"
and frequently hangs. So I thought "SOD IT, Get a new PC"!!

I guess I'm asking "Just how much better is Windows XP from Windows ME"?
What are the good and bad things about Windows XP?

Thanks for all advice.


Chances are good that if ME is unstable, XP will be too. Find out
what is wrong with your current setup and software before considering
an upgrade.
 
Phisherman said:
Chances are good that if ME is unstable, XP will be too. Find out
what is wrong with your current setup and software before considering
an upgrade.

I have to second those sentiments. I've worked with ME on *many* systems and
have never known it to be unstable. If it's that bad for you, then it sounds
like you may have other probelsm to solve first (for example, flaky RAM or a
crappy power supply).
 
Paul said:
Hello,

I'm planning to build myself a new PC soon and wondered if I should upgrade now and use Windows XP
or wait until "Longhorn" is released? (which is about two years away).

At the moment I'm using Windows ME, and it's quite unstable. It, (or IE) keeps giving me "error messages"
and frequently hangs. So I thought "SOD IT, Get a new PC"!!

I guess I'm asking "Just how much better is Windows XP from Windows ME"?
What are the good and bad things about Windows XP?

Thanks for all advice.

win ME, yIkEs! perhaps the worst thing a person can use as an OS...

i'd run win 98 or even 95!! before i'd run ME...
 
Lets face it, ME has always been fairly unstable. XP on the other hand is a
business OS. I think you will find XP 100% better than ME. But, with regards
to waiting for Longhorn, well its a long wait. They haven't even release the
hardware requirements for it yet. I'd strongly suggest that you install your
current machine with XP and hold off for the PC upgrade until we know what
the hardware requirements are for Longhorn.

Poch
 
Poch remarked:
....
Lets face it, ME has always been fairly unstable. XP on the other hand is a
business OS. I think you will find XP 100% better than ME. But, with regards
to waiting for Longhorn, well its a long wait. They haven't even release the
hardware requirements for it yet. I'd strongly suggest that you install your
current machine with XP and hold off for the PC upgrade until we know what
the hardware requirements are for Longhorn.

The alternative for a new PC is a 64bit system with an Athlon 64 and
(later) a Windows XP 64Bit Edition, see
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/downloads/upgrade.asp

Roy
 
Hackworth said:
I have to second those sentiments. I've worked with ME on *many* systems and
have never known it to be unstable. If it's that bad for you, then it sounds
like you may have other probelsm to solve first (for example, flaky RAM or a
crappy power supply).

Don't wait for Longhorn if you'll actually be needing to use this new PC
before 2006.
XP service pack 2 is due later this year (May/June?), and there is going
to be another XP variant ("XP Reloaded" --no kidding- prior to the
release of Longhorn).

I had similar bad experiences with ME. Most of these issues went away
when I upgraded to XP
 
Paul said:
Hello,

I'm planning to build myself a new PC soon and wondered if I should upgrade now and use Windows XP
or wait until "Longhorn" is released? (which is about two years away).

Longhorn = Longwait.
At the moment I'm using Windows ME, and it's quite unstable. It, (or IE) keeps giving me "error messages"
and frequently hangs. So I thought "SOD IT, Get a new PC"!!

That'll fix it :-)
I guess I'm asking "Just how much better is Windows XP from Windows ME"?
What are the good and bad things about Windows XP?

Or how much better is a space shuttle from Icarus' wings.
 
I have been using xp -home and it is very stable. Many people might
suggest the pro version depending on your needs. I upgraded from w98 btw.

The main difference I find is being able to connect to a Windows
2000/2003 domain (not likely to need at home) and you can get IIS
running on Pro, which you might want at home for testing/developing web
pages although if you have a second machine at home with Win2000 on you
could use that a local web server.
 
XP on the other hand is a
business OS. I think you will find XP 100% better than ME.

Alternatively you could go with Windows 2000 as it has better native driver
support for older gear and is reportedly even more stable than XP even tho
the same *engine* is used. I think the re-arrangement in it's function and
style have added some mysterious bugs that only Microsoft can do :-)

The only problem with 2000 is start up time is longer ... normally about
1min 37s XP is about 57s in comparison although times will vary according to
pc and software loaded.

Steve
 
Stevie said:
XP on the other hand is a



Alternatively you could go with Windows 2000 as it has better native driver
support for older gear and is reportedly even more stable than XP even tho
the same *engine* is used. I think the re-arrangement in it's function and
style have added some mysterious bugs that only Microsoft can do :-)

The only problem with 2000 is start up time is longer ... normally about
1min 37s XP is about 57s in comparison although times will vary according to
pc and software loaded.

Steve
XP fools you into thinking it loaded quickly, it just allowed you to log
on before all the services have started.
 
Back
Top