Best Windows OS?

In My Humble Opinion
21
      • I guess one thing that WinXP does do right that Win98 won’t (for me) is that CD-copying/imaging programs (CloneCD and Alcohol120%) wouldn’t mount images on my Win98se install, but they will in WinXP.
  • And before when I said “Win98 runs games better”, I mean that XP runs slower: framerate is slower, controls aren’t as quick.
    ~
22

Win2000 is the most stable I’ve yet used; and the most recoverable if all goes wrong. I’ve only blue-screened twice since I’ve been using it, which is at least 3 years, I guess. I went over to WinXP last year, but it was so shite that I changed back.

23

I use WinXP at home and at work, and last year in a different job I used Win2K. I think I could flip a coin between them, as both have served me very well. I’ve also in the past used Win 3.1, 3.11, 95 and 98, and well, all I can say is “Not if you paid me.” As for ME, I have no personal experience, but I can safely say it’s hell to troubleshoot over the phone.

The only complaint I have about XP Home is the ability to leave multiple profiles active while toggling between them. This can really slow things down.

24

XP has a new, very, very bad, and unless requested, not going to be fixed until SP2 flaw.

http://www.vnunet.com/News/1139809

Massive, and I mean massive memory request/leaks.

25

Older Windows:
hmm… rrrr… well… it’s in the past, let’s not talk about it.

Win ME:
They really ripped the consumer good! C’mon, who fell for the “millenium edition” sales pitch? LOL

Win2K:
!! Yay !!

WinXP:
If you’re on 98/ME or earlier, make the change.
If you’re on 2K, don’t waste your money.

26

I freaking knew it. Ever since I installed SP1 I noticed that my programs ran noticably slower. Everyone I knew just said I was nuts or imaging the problem. It feels good to be vindicated.

27

I’ve used various Windows OSs since Win95. Stability was always a problem until XP. My greatest objection to it is that a person has to have a bit of knowledge to kick it in the pants to make it run the way that she or he wants…most users will be stuck with the few easily used options.

Overall, I think XP is pretty good from the ordinary user’s point of view, but it is a memory hog, and does have a problem with loading up programs; however, once the program is loaded, speeds are fine.

28

Asking this question is like asking who the tallest dwarf is.

29

Another vote here for XP.

ME was the worst (IMO) in terms of failing to deliver what could reasonably be expected and (for me at least) was a noticeable step backward from 98.

30

I have used Windows 3.1, 95, 98, NT4.0 and XP, and I must say XP is the best so far of them. It is vastly more stable than 3.1, 95 or 98; considerably more stable than NT4.0; my roomate has Win2000 and they seem to be just as stable. The only time I have crashed it is when I was running some alpha build software or overclocking my processor. The only problems I have had with it are the default user interface, which is ugly and is just horrible. But switching it to classic is easy and now it works how I want it to. It is also more of a memory hog than earlier versions of windows, but I have a gig of Ram, so that doesn’t matter to me.