I resisted jumping in on this, but the temptation got the better of me.
I respect Ian 's view, but he is a bit like my wife - resistant to
change! No offense intended since jumping in with a change can often
bring on trouble.

I have been using NT since 1992 when it was just a beta item. My feeling
is that the last good version of NT was 3.51 - it never crashed!
However, it also did not run much of the software out there that was
designed for Windows. Presently I am running XP, which is really NT
version 5.1 - and it is relatively stable - much more so than Win9x.
With the things I do, edit images, paste them into complex Word
documents, and other stuff Win9x would constantly require a reboot. With
XP (or Win2k, or NT4) I only need to kill the crashed process and rarely
need to actually reboot the OS. With NT 3.51 I NEVER had to reboot -
actually I did have one crash in over 3 years of running NT prior to
NT4. NT4 was the first that made me aware of what a blue screen was!

Just my experiences.

Peter
------------------
The NoSpin Group
[log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
My 2 cents - Windows 2000. No way on earth would I go back to win9x. I
guess my PC usage would be classified as 'power user' and I install and
remove many apps as part of my job (and for fun!). Since I installed
Win2k SP1 my PC has been bombproof. Crashes are perhaps once a month if
I'm unlucky. Uptime is close to perfect - I no longer bother switching
off my PC. Win98 requires a restart at least every few days. I still
deal with Win98 PC's through work, and every time I do I wonder why
anyone would stick with it (financial reasons usually). 2k and XP are by
far a superior OS.

Rick P

Subject: Re: Upgrading - Need Info

My 2cents?  I won't go past W98SE - fully tweaked and tuned up, of
course.

Ian Porter

             Do you want to signoff PCSOFT or just change to
                    Digest mode - visit our web site:
                   http://freepctech.com/pcsoft.shtml