Thread: XP pro as an OS

well I dont know if I would go for windows XP because yeah it has lots of goodies added into it but all the error erports and **** like that also some hardware is not fully compatable yet. My self I would stick to 95/98 has all the tools I need and still has a DOS back end where as windows XP/2k has DOS bascly built into it.

Originally posted by Stine161
well I dont know if I would go for windows XP because yeah it has lots of goodies added into it but all the error erports and **** like that also some hardware is not fully compatable yet.

You know you can turn error reporting off...

at this point if it's new it will work.. if it's old and it's not supported it probably never will be..

I am trying to find an am/fm radio tuner and the only i can find is for win95.. so it should work under 98.. doubtful under xp..

Most likely I'll end up using 98se

XP Pro is the an excellent operating system to use. You can turn off error reporting. Hell, you can make it so it never tells you a program crashed if you'd like. You can uninstall all of the extra software (Messenger, Movie Maker, etc). You'll have to go to a WindowsXP tweak site in order to figure it out, but it can be done. With the reintroduction of msconfig, you can speed up boot times as well (not that they aren't already the fastest).

As long as you know how to use/configure XP, it'll be the best choice for an OS. People who complain about error reporting and whatnot probably shouldn't use XP as they don't even know where to turn error reporting off.

*shrugs* It's all personal preference though.

Cy

my laptop is tweaked to look pretty.. meaning there is a whole bunch of extra crap running that i don't need.. and it still boots faster than most people that have used 98lite...

I'm very excited to see how fast xp will boot stripped down.. that is this weekends project

how fast is the laptop? how do you think it would run on a slower system like a amd k6-2+ 475mhz machine??

it runs 1ghz on ac, and 733 on battery..

XP was specifically designed to be fast booting (look at the microsoft website it says so )

And guess what.. they didn't lie this time.

I can't make any promises to you.. but if you stripped down xp i'd wager that you'd be able to boot in around 30 seconds with you cpu.. and you would probably boot from hibernate in much less (depending on how much ram really)

no guarantees... just a guess.. your hardware and everything will affect boot times

while it may _seem_ like a faster boot, my machine will lag to hell if I start firing up programs after I _think_ its already started up.

Granted, my machine is almost a year old, so that may be the problem (900 tbird, 512 PC133)

I have built 2 identical systems in the last 3 months for freinds of mine, using Athlon 2000 XP processors on the ECS K7S5A motherboard with 512 PC133, and XP boots AMAZINGLY fast. Like 20 seconds, including POST.

anyway, back to my point. I tried XP on the carputer, and they didnt like each other much. ME crashes maybe once every 2 months, XP crashed every day at least 3 times (in the carputer).

All depends on your hardware.

For reference, I had XP Pro installed on another computer in my apartment. It was a P2 400 with 256mb of PC133. It was fast. I noticed *no* slowdowns, long boot times, etc.

It's all about msconfig.

Cyanide