We help IT Professionals succeed at work.

OS

leestj
leestj asked
on
I have Win 98 and I'm sick of fighting the instability.
I have a 30 gighard drive with 26 open.
Is there a better OS? Where ?, how ?, installing ?  
 problems ?

Thanks
 Lee
Comment
Watch Question

Commented:
Hi.
I'd say there is no OS that's better than any other. It's all what you are looking for. Linux (various distros) are more stable, but lack some ease-of-use in some areas. For a standard desktop which should do normal office-tasks I'd go for Mandrake. http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/

It's a quick and easy distro which installs very quick and very easily. Just slot in your CD, answer a few simple questions (where you are, do you want english keyboard) and you're ready to go.

If you want to keep your current installation of windows on your machine (for games) just choose Expert mode. You don't have to be an expert, you just have to know a little about computers and be able to read.

There are LOTS of other distributions out there, RedHat, SUSE, Debian, Slackware just to mention a few.

Hope this helps

//Haeger

Commented:
Hi.
I'd say there is no OS that's better than any other. It's all about what you are looking for. Linux (various
distros) are more stable, but lack some ease-of-use in some areas. For a standard desktop which should
do normal office-tasks I'd go for Mandrake. http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/
It's a quick and easy distro which installs very quick and very easily. Just slot in your CD, answer
a few simple questions (where you are, do you want english keyboard) and you're ready to go.
If you want to keep your current installation of windows on your machine (for games) just choose Expert
mode. You don't have to be an expert, you just have to know a little about computers and be able to
read.
There are LOTS of other distributions out there, RedHat, SUSE, Debian, Slackware just to mention a few.
Hope this helps
//Haeger
Commented:
I would have to disagree and say that yes, there are certain OSs that are better than others, from a purely technical standpoint.  Windows 95-ME is unstable (relatively) because it uses a shared memory architecture, which means that all the applications use the same memory, and if one application writes to a memory location that it is not supposed to, it can crash the entire operating system.  Linux (and Windows NT-2000) use a protected memory architecture, meaning that one application only has control of a certain memory space.  Its a harder OS to get right, but it is much more stable.  Therefore, if you are looking for basically the same environment but with more stability, I would go with Windows 2000.

However, if you want to take the linux plunge (and I highly recommend it) you will not be dissapointed.  My linux boxes have uptimes of over 100 days, and are still going strong.  I am a big Red Hat fan myself, but I recognize the work that Mandrake has done on useability.  I would suggest dual-booting your system (look at the howtos on www.linuxdoc.org) so that you can keep windows around if you get nostalgic.


Author

Commented:
Thanks for yourinput. I will use a dual boot with some version of Linux.

 Lee

Author

Commented:
Thanks for yourinput. I will use a dual boot with some version of Linux.

 Lee

Explore More ContentExplore courses, solutions, and other research materials related to this topic.