What's so great about XP that I should go out and buy it?

#1 - Pentium 650 MGHz, 384 Mgs Ram - 3 months now
- mainly Corel Draw ver.9, Microsoft Office XP
- was Windows 98

#2 - Pentium 450 MGHz, 384 Mgs Ram - 1 month now
- Flexi-Sign, Corel 9, Inspire, Office 2000
- was Windows ME

#3 - Pentium 850 MGHz, 192 Mgs Ram - 1 month now
- Gerber's Omega (Edge), Corel ver. 9
- was Windows 2000

All three systems are running smoother than before. The installation was a snap with that in itself solving some of the problems that I was having. The #3 system would randomly just shut down about once every two days and that hasn't happened yet. The networking of the computers turned simple as soon as we upgraded the operating systems, whereas we couldn't get it to work properly before (one way communication).

In all I have been very happy with the results of the upgrades and haven't had any complaints except for the odd driver that I wasn't able to find right away.

I know XP is available through several channels in the OEM market, but by and large I would bet the majority of current users of the final version of XP are using the "corporate" version that requires no activation. This is the illegal copy that has flooded the internet for the past few weeks. If your 'source' was good to you, they included the also-pirated "Plus!" pack that accompanied XP in its mass pirated distribution.

As for XP's worth, it is the most remarkable OS so far. It's almost as big a leap forward as 95 was. If this doesnt drive the final nail in the Mac coffin, it will surprise me. That is, if Apple doesnt kill themselves with their new "Darwin" OS, which will run on x86 (intel/amd style) hardware.

I wouldnt consider upgrading to XP till your software manufacturers assure you their stuff runs ok. Corel runs fine, but the sign-only stuff (Inspire, Flexi, Signlab, etc.) may have problems.

XP has a 'compatibility mode' that works some of the time, but not all of the time. Dont count on it to work with your 16-bit sign software unless the author says it will run it.

And to call XP a "consumer grade bloat.." tells me you know very little about it, or computing. XP comes in two flavors, home and professional. The ONLY difference is the added networking toys of professional. The OS itself, remains unchanged.

Please people - check your information from more than one source and for petesake - get it from a real source and not a "I've gotta subscription to Maximum PC so I'm a techie" monday morning quarterback.

If anyone wants more information on XP or any Windows based computing, you can reach me at support@pcillustrated.com or robblowe@hotmail.com

[ October 18, 2001: Message edited by: Robb Lowe ]

1.) There are BETA's and Limited Use versions of XP all over the place, including a download directly from the MS website. Nobody here said anything about having the retail or OEM versions, you only assumed that.

2.) It's gotta say a whole lot about a company who's own employees LEAK THE RETAIL versions of that company's latest and "greatest" software before it's even available. Only MS has the retail version, only MS or an employee can leak it. If everything at MS was all happy and hunky-dory there wouldnt be any reason for an upset employee to leak software, would there?

3.) As far as consumer grade bloat vs. "professional" versions... Here's the system requirements for WinXP straight from Microsoft's site, this is bloat no matter which way you look at it and keep in mind there are people here with faster systems complaining about their machines being slow as molasses:
Here's What You Need to Use Windows XP Professional
PC with 300 megahertz or higher processor clock speed recommended; 233 MHz minimum required (single or dual processor system);* Intel Pentium/Celeron family, or AMD K6/Athlon/Duron family, or compatible processor recommended
128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)
1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available hard disk space*

Whooooooa nellie!

The latest versions of LINUX can still run from a floppy disk on a 386, yet LINUX is more robust and powerful than Windows can ever hope to be - Proof that Windows is nothing but bloat, no matter what version you get. It's just too bad the 3rd party developers didnt jump on Linux like they did Windows, otherwise we'd have sign making equipment with drivers that operate under Linux and it would be a viable option.

4.) Now that the public is generally non-impressed with WinME (cause it's the same thing as Win95/98 with bug fixes that should have been FREE) and the corporate customers have just now gotten used to their Win2K migrations, they want to cram another new OS down our throats only what, a year later??

The only problem I have with Win 2000 is some conflict with my Roland cutter driver for win 2000. It is an annoying but occasional conflict that I think I have found a way around.(fingers crossed, it has been working fine for over a week!)

I have no intention of embracing XP in the near future, since new drivers/support of XP by my hardware manufacturers will probably take some time.

As far as linux is concerned, I have no personal knowledge/experience. My brother swears by it..BUT he also is using it on a second computer...He wouldn't think of giving up his "hated" Windows. WHY???? Because there is very little in the way of software that is usable on Linux.

I trust my brother when he says it is a great operating system, but what use is it if you can't buy software to use on it? Seems to me that using Linux would be like using DOS and trying to design in full colour.

anyone remember:

c:\ CD win
C:\ dir
c:\ xcopy *.*
c:\ a:

A:\ Format C:/s

Windows can actually be ran inside of Linux and get this, it runs better than Windows alone does. If we had linux drivers for all our hardware there wouldnt be any problems running it, and since Windows can operate inside of Linux that means all our windows programs will also run. Basically what Linux does is seperate all the processes from each other, so essentially running multiple programs simultaneously is really more like each program having its own system to run on, and the performance of one program cannot affect the performance of another.. meaning if one program goes screwy, it closes down without taking the rest of the system with it.

As for being 'suckered by a Microsoft rep' nothing could be further from the truth. Although I've worked with Microsoft before, I've worked with other software (and hardware) companies and can honestly say NO ONE has ever put as much effort into making their stuff better than Microsoft.

Still, people insist on complaining about "the evil empire". My blanket answer is an easy one- dont bitch and whine, do something about it - give back the PC and go back to pen and paper.... Say you cant do that because you make your living with a computer? And you're complaining about the people that made it possible?

It's true Microsoft didnt invent the computer, they didnt invent software, they didnt invent a lot of things. But, they made it accessible and fairly cheap for the masses. There are alternatives now, like Mac, Linux, BeOS, OS2, etc. There were alternatives before. The reasons for Windows being the standard and overwhelming choice of the majority is simple - cost, effectiveness, deployment and availability of both software and hardware.

Macintosh could've been the king, but greed, poor management and lack of continuing evolution has rendered it a lost cause. Linux is a bastard OS - too many chiefs and not enough indians. You've got splinter groups out there bastardizing the open source into their own ideas and theories which makes it a mutt of an OS. You'll never see enough hardware support to make it a viable choice for the desktop.

Now to address the points of your post.

1 - The beta's of WinXP are readily available, its true. No one said they were running a beta. If you're dumb enough to load a beta as your primary OS, then you're dumb enough to complain when it blows up.. thats why its called a BETA - it's not bug-free, it's not final code, it's not ready for mission critical deployment. I assumed by default, much like you're assuming they are running betas and trials.

2 - The retail (corporate) version was leaked by someone in the media, a reviewer. It's been traced already. This time, you assumed.

3 - You're quoting of 'bloat' is as anitquated as your thinking. Let's take a look at these parameters of system requirements,

" PC with 300 megahertz or higher processor clock speed recommended; 233 MHz minimum required (single or dual processor system);* Intel Pentium/Celeron family, or AMD K6/Athlon/Duron family, or compatible processor recommended "

Today's AVERAGE retail computer is 1ghz. Top of the line is 2ghz. 300mhz is less than 1/3rd of the standard of today. Microsoft, like most software manufacturers, creates code to have a shelf life of at least one year... as anyone that has owned a computer for more than 6 months can tell you, processor speeds nearly double in the span of a year. A 233mhz minimum is VERY generous in my opinion. Expecting Microsoft to build an OS for less than 1/3rd the current standard is like expecting all schools to teach retarded and prodigal students from the same book.

"128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features) "

Ram prices are less than gasoline these days. Windows 95 needed 16mb to run, 32mb to hum. Considering the quantum leap in technology that XP is over 95, I would say 128mb minimum is a very small concern. XP runs flawlessly on 256mb of ram, which will cost you about $25-50 these days.

"1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available hard disk space "

Have you purchased a hard drive or computer lately? Have you seen one with less than 20gb available in retail channels? No. The standard is around 45gb, with upper end stuff topping 100gb. When Windows 95 came out, a typical hard drive was less than 1gb, and the OS took up around 120mb. That's a little more than 10%. 1.5gb of a 20gb drive is half of that, so I would say all things being equal, they are ahead of the game.

You say Linux can run from a floppy disc, thats true. But what can it or will it really do at that level? DOS for that matter can run from a floppy, and some OS's, like the one in a celphone, can damn near run from speck of fly dung. Whats the point if it doesnt DO anything? Linux is a very limited OS on its own, at least Microsoft gives you the tools with the toolbox. Fonts, word processing, graphics, internet, email, system maintainence, cd burning, fax, media players and creators, games, etc. By the time you had to buy comparable (keyword there - comparable) stuff for linux, you'd be up there in money and hard drive space. Not to mention you couldnt actually DO anything, since the rest of the world doesnt talk the same language.

Your next point was " (condensing here) WinME wasnt impressive, Win2000 is less than a year old, why cram a new OS down our throats". Well, its like this... WinME was a stopgap product. It was the OS for dummies. With auto-backups, deeper hidden switches, more flash (movie maker etc., heavy on media as was the trend that year) and more polish on the GUI, it was the right product for a time when the world saw millions turn on a PC for the first time. Yes, it was a more refined 9x. Yes, it was more stable. But also it had more under the hood than most ever noticed or dug into.

Windows 2000 on the other hand, was the first salvo fired in the new world of OS's. It was necessary to start the ball rolling for both public and business computing, because you cant expect the world to change all at once. Not in the way of software and hardware. To you a computer is a one or maybe two place entity, but in a corporate enviroment you're talking 25-2500 units that have to work together, share information, programs etc - without missing a beat.

Windows XP is the first quantum step in computing since Windows 95. For the first time the OS will be almost a living thing - it will work with you, for you and do things with you in mind. It will arrange and form itself around your work habits, styles and ideas.

Let me share a memory, to better explain why I'm so impressed with Windows XP.

I play guitar, and one of my musical 'fathers' was Stevie Ray Vaughan. His drummer was a guy named Chris Layton, who once in an interview explained what prompted him to take up the drums. "I was watching (some famous drummer at the time, possibly Buddy Rich or Krupa?) on Sullivan, and commented to my dad how easy it looked. My dad said, ' the great ones always make it look easy' "

Windows9x started the trend, but Windows XP takes it to a much higher level. It makes things easier, it does things for you, it arranges and moves and does backups and watches over you like a worrysome mother at times - all without showing its hand or getting in the way. No it doesnt send your underwear size back home to Redmond, Washington. No it doesnt tell them you're homepage is signporn.com or ripping a pirated copy of "Saving Ryans Privates". It just makes the computing expierence more productive, less strenuous and a lot more fun.

The last point Mike makes is about money. This is the typical knee jerk reaction to all things Microsoft. Look at it this way... what do you charge to letter a set of doors? $50? $100? $200? How long does it take you? 1 hour? 4 hours? Now how long did it take you to learn to do that sort of work? Do you not deserve to be paid for it? If no one paid you for it, would you continue to do it? If you didnt get paid, would you be motivated to do better work, learn more, push the envelope of design and technique?

Hell no.

Windows ME cost you less than a door job, and I promise it took a huge team of people a lot longer than 2 hours to write. Windows XP will cost twice that, no doubt.

But.... here's something no one wants to admit.

If you did not have a computer, you would be making a lot less money. That is, if you could do your job at all. I would bet there are 2000 computerized sign makers today to every one brush painter of 15 years ago. I know I couldnt be in this business without one. It does for me what the wheelchair and voice synthesizer do for Stephen Hawking. It releases in me what my hands cannot.

For the record - I do not own any stock in Microsoft, I've never gotten paid by them, I've used macs, linux boxes and a few other lesser known OS's, and I've worked at several levels in the computer industry from systems administrator to webmaster to tech support to sales. I've built a website to teach the world computing, but the declining ad revenues forced me to make a decision to turn it into a paying entity instead. Perhaps a book, perhaps a subscription, perhaps free again, I dont know at this point. I've been in the sign and t-shirt business since 1993 primarily because I wanted to work in motorsports which has always been my first love. Family and business issues along the way turned it into a full service, open to the public business along the way. I've always enjoyed it, and to me that defines success. Computers have lured me away along the way for stints, but I've never closed the doors on the artistic side of my life.

So...Am I to assume that I can run Corel 9 with any added doo-dads?

Also...I am not upgrading...I just ordered a new system:

Nobilis a205 Select

Processor 1.2 GHz AMD Athlon Socket-A Processor
Memory 256 MB PC133 SDRAM Memory
Motherboard ASUS A7V133 Motherboard
Hard Drive 20 GB Quantum/Maxtor ATA/100 7200 RPM HDD
Graphic Card eVGA e-TNT2 M64 32MB Nvidia Graphics
Sound Card Integrated Creative Labs CT5880 Sound
Floppy Drive 1.44M Floppy Drive
CDROM 52X IDE CD-ROM
2nd CDROM None
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Pro / Factory Installed
Case NobleCase ProTool-Free Midtower Case w/ 250W P/S
Monitor None
Keyboard KeyTronic KT800 PS/2
Mouse None
Speakers None
Network Card None
Fax Modem US Robotics 56k PCI
Tape Backup None
Application Software None
Warranty 3 Year Depot Warranty
Utility Software None
Power Products None
Scanner None
Printer None
Printer Cable None

Now...please understand that I am NOT a computer wiz...I an just an old dinosaur that knows how to use a brush....the system I am using is one step above carving letters in rock

So...maybe someone can tell me how to turn the damn thing on! hahaha

I still see no reason to upgrade to XP if your system is already working fine for you. In the case of a new machine, fine, that's a fresh start with new hardware and aside from getting used to the new GUI or reverting it back to the old interface, Im sure it will be a smooth transition.. maybe with a few hiccups with old sign equipment drivers and software, which alot of signies will still have major fits with...

Computers are just another tool to me. Yes, I use computers. Yes, they make things easier. I am not dependant upon a computer to make a living. If I didnt have a computer I'd just find some other tool to use. I can do 98% of my work with an X-acto knife and an airbrush.

All programs go on the main h/d and all files go on the slave (2nd h/d).

Three reasons:
1. If you get a virus, it's a pain, but you can Format and reload programs.
2. Files on the 2nd h/d won't be infected, and you won't lose them!
3. Your puter will load faster.

Saved my butt TWICE!

I have listened to a number of message boards and web sites concerning XP, and there doesn't seem to be many "middle of the roaders". People are either very excited about XP, or on the other extreme, they want to strangle Bill Gates.

An interesting observation: those praising Windows XP are almost universally the people whose business depends on an OS working, and working tirelessly, all the time, day in and day out. They see in XP a giant step forward, and an exciting, inexpensive new partner in their business.

The naysayers are many of the same people who loved Win 3.1 and bitched about moving to Win 95. Why mess with a good thing? They don't like Microsoft, and they view big computer business as a conspiracy to rob, cram and spy on them.

I'm with you, Rob. I will definitely upgrade to XP when I know there are no compatability issues with the software I depend on. (Yes, I depend on computers - don't you?)

Mine was stubborn, being a home brew and it took a team of Microsoft employees to install it, uninstall it, reinstall it and fiddle dink around with it. Six hours later I was up and running. Fortified with plenty of Starbucks finest I configured the plotter, I had brought my Ioline 36 incher along because they thought it was a good idea at the time, and quickly designed and plotted a small paper sign that read "The Memphis install, nothin' to it !!!" they weren't amused but I was a bit dingy at that point. I really enjoyed the coffee.

Anyway I still use my complimentary copy of the final release and ended up throwing out 1(one) laser printer and 1(one) Umax scanner after untold hours of time, sweat, blood and tears. The manufacturers tried to help but their latest drivers and hardware couldn't solve the flakey performance. Seems MS changed something that worked for the 14 months of the beta releases but persistence paid off and they finally managed to screw it up. There's no substitute for determination.

So...just how FAST can you make one of these baby's run....is there a limit to FAST?

Well there seems to be a lot of fancy dancing with tech info and hype on how great Windows XP will make my life, but I still don't see any hard facts on how XP will make my daily use of a computer better. A prettier GUI and fancy media tricks don't make me money, now most of the Ads i have read boast features like music, photo, & video tools.

And the business edition has some better communication tools. SO WHAT!

Still I have not heard enough to make me part with $100-$200 dollars.

My main graphics system is a PIII 733, my Home system is a PIII 1GHZ and my little ole bookwork computer is an old 233mhz.

Now my old 233 answers the phone recieves faxes and does my books. And it does quite well no doubt.

I refuse to buy a new PC just to have the latest OP that in my opinion is over bloated as well.
I'm still going to have more info before I buy

If I didn't have an Edge I'd still be running a 233mhz on that system as well. You see most people don't even know what they need, only what the "buzz" words are.

We are sheep people, that's how the computer industry looks at us.

Most people have the most powerfull typewriters ever made. A 1.5ghz system to surf the web make letters and play vegas games.

Baaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh! Sheep, Sheep I say

[ October 21, 2001: Message edited by: Bob Rochon ]

Solitaire will only run so smoothly, ya know?

For the general public, these new machines are way overkill for what they're being used for - email, websurfing, games, burning CD's, bookkeeping, word processing..

People LOVE that big MHz or GHz number, sadly enough those numbers are negated thanks to other bottlenecks in the computer, like slow harddrives, slow or not enough RAM, slow video performance, and even a slow motherboard (all boards are not created equal) but the consumer level market will never take that into consideration... or it's just too much for them to think about, so they don't even get the option when they buy their computer from an appliance chain store.

Ive since taken that back, and found a IBM think pad that has 98se installed on it.. last one in Edmonton...

XP has lots of bells & whistles ... you'll be amazed at how fast it boots up, took me by surprise first time i turned it on...

Accessories has a program called compatability wizard, and you run it on an exe. file that doesnt want to run in xp.. you can than emulate back to win 95... it does work.. a printer install disk wouldnt load in xp, but put it to win 95 and shazaam....

my two cents worth...

So far, it's only worked on one program for me, but thats a start.

My recommendation has been to set up machines as 'dual boot' for people that like myself, have programs that will only run in a Win9x enviroment.

That's a whole other discussion though.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robb Lowe:
Macintosh could've been the king, but greed, poor management and lack of continuing evolution has rendered it a lost cause.

---

Once run on an XP computer it becomes windows XPENSIVE.