Win XP and repartitioning

[Joshua Bergland]

Ok, to continue the 'conversation' ...

First, xp runs just fine on my Pentium II 350, 256Mb machine... Second, 
xp is NT 5.1 aka, the next version of Windows 2000, the next version NT 
5.2 is currently codenamed Longhorn and beta testing is to get underway 
early next year, and don't forget that .NET server Beta 3 was just 
released last week... I think of xp as Windows 2000 with the new tools 
introduced in ME and visual styles...

Third, and most improtantly, if you want to keep your friends, stop 
recommending ME... I haven't talked to anyone that is pleased with the 
os... It lasted 1 week on my machine when I discovered that its audio 
processes didn't seem to be properly prioritized, and I always for very 
choppy sound, when no other Microsoft os has manifested that problem...

Ok, off of my MS soapbox, atleast for this round...

Josh Bergland

Brian Densmore wrote:

>Not to start an M$ flame war, but ...
>I would recommend ME over any other version of Win9x (it has all the
>patches, and is the most stable of the breed). Win2000 is the most
>stable Winblows version available. And again there is the running
>caveat, Never buy M$ version XX.0 anything, always wait for version XX.2
>or .3 or more, XP is like version 6.0 if I understand it correctly. I
>could be wrong on this. Isn't XP the merger of Win 9x with NT? Lastly,
>all the testers I have read recommend not getting XP, or if you do, make
>sure you get a dual processor PC. I'm sorry, but I'm not shelling out
>big bucks for a dual CPU PC just to run Word or LookOut.
>
>IMHO,
>Brian
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Joshua Bergland [mailto:josh at mrj412.com]
>>Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 11:53 AM
>>To: kclug at kclug.org
>>Subject: Re: Win XP and repartitioning
>>
>>
>>Seems you've beaten me to the punch with the mbr answer, but 
>>I do want 
>>to make a quick comment.
>>
>>He said he's running Win ME ... This is (imho) possibly the worst 
>>version on the 9x line, and an upgrade to WinXP will 
>>definitely result 
>>in more stability... Now, if you want something stable 
>>without all the 
>>added bloat of a flashy interface (although I am a sucker for 
>>a flashy 
>>interface, the Ximian user I am), and the abilty to install more than 
>>once,  try Windows 2000.
>>
>>Joshua Bergland
>>
>>Richard Edelman wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday 19 November 2001 10:08 am, Eric Gilliland wrote:
>>>
>>>>I am running Win ME and Mandrake 8.0 on my dual boot Dell 
>>>>
>>8100.  If I
>>
>>>>upgrade to Win XP, does anyone know if it will erase my 
>>>>
>>linux partition?
>>
>>>It shouldn't destroy any linux partitions, but it will erase 
>>>
>>your master boot 
>>
>>>record, so make sure you have a linux boot disk handy so you 
>>>
>>can reinstall 
>>
>>>lilo (or grub, if that's what you use).  Another note: you 
>>>
>>should probably 
>>
>>>read the Dual Booting Win2k and Linux HowTo at linux.com 
>>>
>>(don't have time to 
>>
>>>look for a link, sorry), as WinXP, I believe, uses the good 
>>>
>>ol' NT Boot 
>>
>>>Loader. Daisy chaining boot loaders... eww...
>>>
>>>Yet another note :)  Why are you looking at 'upgrading' to 
>>>
>>XP? I've played 
>>
>>>with the betas/release candidates and wasn't really 
>>>
>>impressed. XP really 
>>
>>>doesn't have too much to offer as far as an upgrade. It may 
>>>
>>well do you good 
>>
>>>to read some reviews on XP before throwing down the money for it.
>>>
>>>
>>>Rich
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>majordomo at kclug.org
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>majordomo at kclug.org
>>