Is there a stable version of Windows?
Is there a stable version of Windows?
(OP)
At work, I run Windows NT and to this point, I have had no problems. My computer at home though runs Windows ME, I have had nothing but trouble. To this point, it has corrupted several programs that now need to be reinstalled and dies if I try to extrude a solid in Solidworks. Lately it has been freaking out with Word docs.
I am about ready to go out and buy Windows XP, but I thought I would ask around to see if there was a better option. This is a relatively new computer with a P3 933mHz and 128MB Ram. I will probably upgrade RAM as well, but 128 should be more than enough to run Word or extrude a solid without dying.
I am about ready to go out and buy Windows XP, but I thought I would ask around to see if there was a better option. This is a relatively new computer with a P3 933mHz and 128MB Ram. I will probably upgrade RAM as well, but 128 should be more than enough to run Word or extrude a solid without dying.






RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
DimensionalSolutions@Core.com
While I welcome e-mail messages, please post all thread activity in these forums for the benefit of all members.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
By the way I do have a copy of Win98SE ready to install on this laptop. I have just been too lazy. My desktop has Win98SE running on it. Have not had any problems with it.
Just my opinion
Live Aloha
Frank M.
Tradewind Resources
http://twrusa.tripod.com
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
There are some bugs in Windows ME, but the culprit of the problems are these programs that are running in the back-ground.
Run msconfig from the command line and see the trash that is slowing your computer down. Especially when it is a brand computer like compaq. Every time you log on to the internet, you get tips and hints about updates and other weird stuff?
Does your computer runs out of resources with only a few open programs? Then it is time to clean up your start-up options.
The amount of icons on the right side of the taskbar is proportional to amount of problems.
Windows XP, my opinion with every update or bugfix you have to update your hardware (in other words by another computer)
My Pentium II 400 mhz with NT beats the heck out of my Pentium III 1000mHz running ME
Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I got XPpro OS because the salesman told me that XP might not do design work very well.
My old one with 400mhz, 192 RAM freezes with SW every time.
So far this goes like the wind..
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Dont bother with Windows XP, I was running it on a 1.5 P4, 512 RAM and a Geforce 3; it was slower than ME and almost every program I ran crashed. The activation issue really doesnt sit well with me either.
Regards
AJ
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Keep your eyes open for the release of "Lindows"
The operating system is built on the Linux kernel and is capable of running Windows programs. Reports from beta users is that the OS is not a RAM Hog and system reliability very high. I am looking forward to its release later this year, then maybe I wont have to reboot twice a day.
Live Aloha
Frank M.
Tradewind Resources
http://twrusa.tripod.com
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Jack Hardie
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I would also go for at least 256 megs of ram.
Win2k, supports plug and play, USB and is very stable.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Abhijeet Oundhakar
Design Engineer
STUP Consultants Ltd.
Bombay, India
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I have Win2k and it runs great!
I won't bother with XP for some time.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
As for Linux, I used to think that Unix was "the bee's knees" - but that was 20 years ago. Linux is an OS that
fundamentally is based on 30 year old technology. Unless
you have need to actually look at the source code (which
if I were building a BattleBot I'd need to), I just don't see what the big deal about it is. It seems to keep trying to play catchup with Windows and device compatibility. I've got better things to do with my time.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
As far as Linux is concerned: it certainly is stable and good - but at this moment still only for those who like a Unix-like environment (and have time to accept a rather steap learning curve).
For those people that actually use a computer to get some work done, Windows is still the best bet - althoug Linux with KDE or Gnome are catching up.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Finally, Windows ME may be the worst OS Microsoft has offered since Windows 1.0......... Windows 98 SE is far superior in the non-NT Kernal Windows OS's.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
it's a good thing. on all other versions of windoze, if your program munches the os, you can be totally hosed. xp allows you to rollback the os to a previous state.
TTFN
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I don't know how XP or the ME works....But general opinion says that it is full nothing but bugs, I believe going for Win2K is much more better, I am a software engineer developing softwares for the Plant designs and we 2 moved from NT to Win2K...and we are on it from past 1.5 to 2 years and no problems with that...
These are my Specifications I hope it helps you.
O.S : Windows 2000 Professional with ServicePack 2
Hardware Configuration : Pentium 3 with 1GHz along with 512 MB RAM and 20GB hard disk.
With Regards
Satish
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
On your "specific" question, all reports I've heard point to Win2000 as the most stable and reliable. However... drivers, etc. might be tougher to use than others Windows versions.
Dan
www.dtware.com
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Also, it's funny how anyone can think that Linux has any catching up to do with Win. The system is great, fast and stable. The only thing is to get AFFORDABLE professional software on this great platform. The ball is in the developers' court, and they're not even looking at it.
Abhijeet Oundhakar
Design Engineer
Rashid Al Owais Engg. & Consulting
Sharjah, UAE
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
This machine runs NT4 on 128M and is rock solid, at work I use a mixture of W2000 on 1 Gig which is great, and HPUX which I loathe mildly. Of the three I'd say the NT4 machine is the most stable, but it also runs the least challemging software. I suspect the HP workstation has hardware issues, leastways I can make it reboot by thumping the desk! It's had a couple of visits to the hospital already.
Cheers
Greg Locock
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
- Win2k is the most stable - but drivers are an issue, particularly with respect to setting up less common hardware configurations like dual monitors on laptops, etc.
- XP - Pro or Home - is more stable than any version of Win9x. They are both built on Win2k.
- Win ME has the worst of both worlds: the underlying code is Win98SE, and the front end/graphics/drivers are from XP. It was a doomed product from the get-go.
- Windows - any flavor - has problems when a lot of programs have been installed and "properly" removed (I hate the term 'uninstalled.') If you test a lot of software, you will eventually have to wipe the hard drive clean and start over. You will have the least number of problems with a given PC by installing as few programs as possible on it.
- XP can be crashed - but it's a hell of a lot more stable than Win98SE.
If you plan on using your copy of Win98SE (or any Win9x, for that matter), then do yourself a big favor: set up a partition at the end of the hard drive to be used exclusively by the Windows swap file. (We now do this routinely on all our machines - even those running 2000 Pro and XP Pro.) When Win9x crashes, the OS can still try to write the swap file's contents to the hard drive, or write to the FAT, sub-directories, etc. This causes cross-linked files, scrambled sub-directories, etc. And the Win9x files can be corrupted, too. Re-installing the OS 'over' the existing install doesn't necessarily fix the problem, either. You have to install into a new folder, and reinstall all your programs.All of our machines have at least two partitions. And they rarely crash; it's a 50-50 mix between Win2k and XP Pro.
Oh, and on the "whining" about the cost of extra memory, faster hardware, etc.: I'll be happy to sell you my Compaq "luggable" - it runs MS DOS 6.22 on a 7 inch monochrome CGA monitor, a 5.25 inch 360k floppy, a 44 Mb Miniscribe HD with 28 ms average access time. I have already installed Norton Utilities 8, WordPerfect 4.2, Lotus 1-2-3 version 2.0a, and MS FORTRAN 2 so it's ready to go. And it still works. Really.
Please see FAQ731-376 by VPL for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Lindows clearly is not ready for prime time, but what is it trying to be anyway. I was a PC "pioneer" (my first "laptop" was a Compaq Portable II much like Focht3 except the biggest hard disk you could put in it was 10 MB) and learned the misery of DOS, Unix, and Assembler. If you are not a programmer why would you want to go through that today? I use my computer do do stuff, not to write stuff for others to use. I want MathCad, AutoCad, a word processor, a spreadsheet, a presentation package, Internet, and e-mail. If I have to write a program to improve my personal productivity I use Visual Basic and it does good enough. Why would anyone want to have to write a mini-program just to link a Linix program to the resources it needs?
Windows XP does a really fine job at all of the things I need and I know that EVERY new version or new application will have been tested on an XP platform (it may not be currently bug free, but I know the vendor made a run at it) which may not be true on a Linix platform and most likely is not true on a Win9X platform. Anyone running ME, 95, or 98SE is just asking for more time dealing with crashes than productive work.
Complain about Gates all you want (I do too), but at the end of the day I have to know an awfully lot less about how a program talks to Windows XP than I did under DOS or Unix and I like it that way. The misery I used to go through just to change printers sitll gives me nightmares.
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
www.muleshoe-eng.com
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I haven't upgraded to Windows XP for two reasons mainly: 1) I still use some DOS programs for which I have some technical applications and 2) I do not agree with a serialized program policy that matches the program to your machine and I don't agree in having to buy a new license when i decide to upgrade my computer's motherboard and/or processor. Those are unfair and bullish practices from Microsoft. When I'll decide to upgrade I'll probably do so to Linux and then maybe I'll upgrade the Windows platform to run only those Windows programs that require it within the Linux OS (just to have minimum web contact with Microsoft).
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I had some trouble with Win XP (always HD-activity in the background and long starting times on program execution) using the same Computer. I prefer Win 2000 Pro because I had no trouble during the last 15 month although the system is often pushed to its limit with interior ballistic calculation on Mathcad and 3d-solid-construction on Solid Edge.
Some parameters of the OS should be modified. Setting switches like "AlwaysUnloadDll" etc. and the parameter for 2nd-Level-Cache of the processor-type. I modified about 15 of such parameters. Go through the forums (like winhelpline etc.) to get the correct configuration. You can switch off some system services, too (to improve PC-performance). I don“t know which - but there are some professionels on this board to answer the question.
Good Luck
Andreas Nehme
mail@waffentechnik.com
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Most DOS apps will run under 2k and XP (possibly some that didn't run under 2k will run under XP; it seems that part has been improved, but don't quote me on that :) ). It's worth a try, anyway. Stay with 2k, if you don't like the activation "feature" out of principle. In real, it's not that much of a hassle.
The 9x platform plain sucks in terms of stability and productivity compared to the 2k/XP Pro versions. No way back for me. I do software development, do all kinds of odd stuff to my system, yet I can have it up without any problems for months at a time: no resource problems, no crashes, no nothing. This is unheard of in the 9x world.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I just thought about it and I've been using computers in one form or another for 20 years (starting with a Commodore 64), and I'm only 24 years old.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
And that is in addition to the wars that Microsoft and different software manufacturers (i.e. Netscape that are competition to MS products) wage on your computer trying to disable each other's applications.
And please don't tell me that my problems are due to virus attacks ( I have used several up-to-date antivirus programs and none of them detects anything abnormal ever). The only virus that I would suspect is one coming out from a software protection scheme, either software based or software manufacturer's web based at time of registering your product and that normally won't be detected by any antivirus program.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I won't address most of that post - not enough time in the day.
Simply put, you have to reinstall the OS (Win2K, XP - both flavors.) "Repair" won't work. It apparently has to do with how the motherboard drivers are loaded.
This is a well-known issue; and does not appear to be related to ...the copy protection and validation process...
Please see FAQ731-376 by VPL for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Dan
www.dtware.com
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Please see FAQ731-376 by VPL for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Incidedentally, this is one of the key reasons that Apple has so few motherboard designs floating around; the OS is crafted to very specific hardware. It results in much more reliable operation - and faster boots.
Please see FAQ731-376 by VPL for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
That would be a correct approach for a propietary architecture environment in hardware but Windows flies on an open architecture one with many, many different hardware combination possibilities and as such with many upgrade possibilities as new technologies and better perfomance components develop. So, the approach in Windows XP would limit enormously the number of component upgrades that the owner may make on his computer. So, who would benefit from this? The computer makers and/or software manufacturers of course, since you'll be forced to buy a new one or buy a new Windows license instead. The times that you can upgrade as many times as you wished are over. This being said I still think the reason behind it is copy protection, a cheap and a very clever one may I add. Has anyone given any thought to the possibility for software manufacturers to have access to the processor's serial number? I know that according to Intel the processor activation process is through the setup program but could any software manufacturer have access to this serial number through "a back door" (unknown to the user) that is very common in the programming world?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
As an aside, I thought the reason there were so few motherboard (and other hardware) options for Apple computers was because of the licencing fees Apple charges.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
For what I see your XP machines are behaving very much the same as my Win 98 machine is ( keeping the distance, of course, in software improvements and applications run). I think that if software manufacturers were somewhat more transparent on their products it would be a lot easier for the user to find the cause of these problems. Or maybe they don't want you to find out?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Please see FAQ731-376 by VPL for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
TTFN
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Please see FAQ731-376 by VPL for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
When I bought my first 286 in 1980's, there were easily 8 different operating systems and an equal number of equivalent office software suites. The odds of getting:
> OS and software to be compatible
> your file and someone else to be compatible
was close to ZERO.
Not only that, since everyone was off on a different software, you could never find anyone with the same problem, either to fix it or to lament it.
Nowadays, everyone uses Office and Windoze, which means that everyone can help everyone else, because everyone has the same set of problems. Files and jumpdrives can be swapped wily-nily. Think how hard it was to get Zip drives to behave on different systems.
TTFN
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
The anti-MS champion Sun Microsystems was never shy about that with their own workstation products. In fact, Sun went out of its way to ensure the lack of forward and backward compatibility on many of their products.
TTFN
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
MSDOS consisted of a core, that was less than 200kB, along with over 100 application programs that were completely separate from the operating system. All told, there was barely 10MB of executable code, compared to nearly 1GB for current OS's.
And lest anyone think that MSDOS was problem free, don't forget that MSDOS went through SIX major revisions, and most users wouldn't even attempt to go back to anything before MSDOS3.3
MSDOS started out with ZERO support for EMM, ZERO support for hard disks, ZERO support for multitasking, ZERO support for TSR's, ZERO support for any sort of windowed user interface, ZERO support for networking, ZERO support for any peripherals whatsoever.
Apparently, you've all forgotten how difficult it was to get different applications to play nicely with DOS, EMM, and it various TSR's. I distinctly remember having 4 or 5 different config.sys and autoexec.bat sets for different applications. MSDOS5.0 was the first version that allowed you to reconfigure at bootup, so all the different config.sys versions were in one file.
TTFN
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Yes, there are lots of security holes in Windows (all flavors.) But the same goes for OS X, Linux, Solaris, BeOS, etc., etc., etc. It's just that those other flavors involve damn few machines, so very few are interested in exploiting them. I assure you that OS X - and every other Apple OS - would have been successfully exploited had Apple owned 90% of the PC marketplace.
And don't get too wistful about DOS. I ran one of the original IBM PCs with IBM PC-DOS 1.0 (Microsoft OS with IBM label and a few tweaks.) IT REALLY SUCKED! That's how I got it - my boss was used to TRS-80's from Radio Shack; he was disgusted with how rudimentary the damn things were (hardware and software) - for $5,000 apiece. He's Cajun, and tends to swear a lot when he gets mad. He was very mad that Monday morning....
Anybody still running a TRS-80 for business? What OS? When was it patched last?
Please see FAQ731-376 by VPL for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
The only saving grace was that if you had a couple of good tools, you could patch the OS, at will, by yourself. Plus, there were plenty of people trying to do exactly the same thing, so there was plenty of support, although not from Digital Research.
TTFN
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Got one of them plus 2 TI 99-4As' tape drive memory 16K ram mem 8 + 8 running on Ti basic with the Chicklet keyboard. Never could do much except play games.
As I've mentioned before the IBM mainframe I started on had to be hand wired for each program and data input with punched cards. The input data sheets for the keypunch operators had to have all the blanks filled with O's leading and trailing.
You certainly didn't want to ask one the fellows in the blue suits anything about the machine. They would work on the innards but service stopped at the keyboard.
I made that mistake.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I wouldn't say that it NEVER crashes, but it is not too bad at all- certainly no worse, and probably better, than a Mac of the same vintage (7.5, I had several and they crashed once every two hours just like Win 3.11), and since Linux didn't have a graphical desktop then it wasn't even in contention.
I find Microsoft bashing rather silly. They are a big company operating very succesfully. We, the consumers, have aided and abetted their monopolistic position.
Cheers
Greg Locock
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Word, Powerpoint, Excel, Acrobat are all lingua franca BECAUSE there is a standard, unliked though it might be.
This is not unlike the days when every railroad company had a different track gauge until railroad monopolies were able to standardize track gauges and make it possible to ship things transcontinental without changing railroad cars.
TTFN
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I remember using a Vic20 with 3k free RAM
Have somewhat stabilized Win XP (I stress SOMEWHAT) - sems the "new" webclient service had a lot to do with problems we were expeiencing (as well as the Win XP tooltip bug that they have a fix for but you have to jump through hoops to get). Disabled the webclient. Still think Win 2000 pro was more stable. Have basically disabled all the "new " enhancements in Xp and it even looks like Win 2000 now. But I can now get through most (well, more than half) days without crashing.
FYI Computer is:
Dell 3.06Ghz P4
1Gb RAM
SCSI 30Gb HD
Fire GL (don't remember specifics) 64Mb Video
ummm, trackball (hate mice)
Also helped to set the swap file as fixed rather than windows-managed. Set as 2Gb (and even with 1Gb RAM I have entered the swap zone)
Of course at home (where I'm typing now) I have to be different - FreeBSD. Only thing it won't do is run Solid Edge that I use at work.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
It hasn't been possible since the mid-80's to even come close to fully testing every possible combination of user/hardware/application/attack interaction.
Your questions are somewhat rhetorical, since I don't believe that anyone can or has come up with fool-proof, bulletproof, and tamper-proof ANYTHING. That's independent of monopoly issues.
Most user seem to think, that there some non-infinite approach to testing software, there isn't and again, hasn't been since the mid-80's, when software had only thousands of lines of code. Human programmers write and humans test. They can't foresee all the possibilities, nor can we even begin test all the possibe ways software can be run or attacked.
A good example is the DES encryption standard. Ignoring conspiracy question, the DES was thought to be extremely safe 20 yrs ago, because hardware was not fast enough, nor was there algorithm to break the factorization problem. We now know better, and the DES was relatively simple from a complexity perspective.
I've worked on the development of small 16-bit microprocessors, which were absurdly simple by today's standards, but we were never able to fully simulate, much less test, the product to identify all the possible defects. Many defects were and are data dependent. We had problem that took us nearly 3 yrs to get to solve, partly due to other priorities and partly due to complexity.
My point is that you shouldn't trust your prized possession to anyone, if you can avoid it. Run your taxes and then put the data on a CD and lock in a firesafe. Don't store your passwords on your computer, don't store anything worth anything on any computer with access to the internet.
TTFN
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Not at all. The /most/ you can /expect/ from a monopoly is a product that is just good enough to prevent an alternative from springing up.
To be honest I disagree with you - Windows 2000 is rock solid in my experience. In the last year and a half I have had no viruses, no downtime (other than from a flaky memory chip) and no device driver problems. You sound like an open source zealot (which is fine) and if you are then I can tell you that Linux has a LONG way to go before it is ready for the general corporate desktop.
Maybe after IBM has had a couple of years experience with it there might be good distro around, and the main faults in OO may be fixed, but you should bear in mind that IBM are not doing this because they love Linux, they are doing it for business reasons.
Anyway, this debate seems to be wandering into /. territory, rather than engineering.
Cheers
Greg Locock
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
Please see FAQ731-376 for great suggestions on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
RE: Is there a stable version of Windows?
I seem to notice that despite the many problems raised not many people actually blamed the software manufacturers that write code that is not "fully compatible" with windows (any version). A friend of mine recently pointed out that W2000 is stable because it supports a narrower range of products (both hardware and software) as someone said earlier.
How many hardware manufacturers write decent drivers for windows? I've noticed that HP is almost criminal in that it supplies new drivers for every printer/plotter it produces, but does not offer full windows support. ie. its driver for the HP500 series plotter does not actually support bi-directional control even though the plotter operating software insists that it does. Also some HP drivers will run a variety of HP printers but HP still install new drivers to "ensure full compatibility".
How about all of the developers that install new DLLs over old and cause issues for other programs that use the same DLL. Also applies to some removal software, yep, it removes the software alright but does not correct the registry. A good recipe for software crashes.
Despite this thread having its major discussion regarding windows we need to remember that windows is now also reasonably integrated into other programs, so all problems encountered that result in a crash may not be due to windows.
regards
sc