|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
But it's about those who have regular crashes. If your computers
don't regularly lock up, then more power to you.
And yes, it is an individual matter because people do a lot of
different things to the Omega software in particular and to their
computer in general. But for those of you who are sitting on the
fence with windows 98 and windows NT, and experience regular problems,
the upgrade is essential, in my opinion.
Sure you can solve problems with the tune-ups, tweaks and reinstalls.
But you have to do it again, and again, and again, and again if you
have to do it at all. Some people fancy this, but I personally don't
like an operating system in my face.
RA> "98" Dittos Richard!
RA> And a comment from a previous post --
RA> After years of troubleshooting software, hardware, network, and other
RA> issues-- I've found that it's very easy to make erroneous assumptions and
RA> diagnoses -- especially if one is not very experienced with technical
RA> glitches and has little or no experience with the art.
RA> Imho, many of the problems that people reported with W98, and thought they
RA> fixed by trudging through the arduous upgrade jungle to W2K, could have
RA> been fixed by a few tweaks and tune-ups and sometimes a re-install-- but
RA> you'll never convince them that it might have even been a possibility.
RA> And yes, I'm sure we'll hear from the "but this, but that" tekkies, but as
RA> the old dude said "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
RA> _____________________________________
RA> At 10:00 PM 08/01/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>>Dear Craig & Group,
>>
>>Well, I guess we all have are own individual experience.
>>
>>As one of those stick in the mud old farts, I'd like to say that for years
>>I've been running TS4 and, more recently, TS2Ki on Win98SE without any of
>>the problems that I hear so much about on this
>>newsgroup. We've talked a lot about why there seems to be such
>>differences in experience about this. For me, is it that I'm only
>>following a couple of issues (ES and several indeces)??? Or maybe
>>that I'm using an old multi-monitor card (a Colorgraphic
>>Evolution-4)??? Or maybe because I'm in Seattle, just across Lake
>>Washington from Win98's home, and Win98 just may prefer tall trees and ocean
>>breeze???
>>
>>So, thank you for your suggestion, but all in all, I'd prefer to follow a
>>favorite saying of my ex-father-in-law, born, raised, and died under the
>>hot Texas sun (and from my perspective, stubbornness
>>personified): "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
>>
>>Mind you, I am certainly not challenging your experience, much less
>>blaming you for it. My OS has been stable for me so far, for which I am
>>truly grateful, and my first desire would be to hear that
>>yours is too. If I had the problems you and others are having with Win98,
>>I'd be pissed too. I'm only saying that I believe the problem lies deeper
>>than "Win98 is lousy," and that there may be
>>legitimate reasons why some people, under some circumstances, have so far
>>abstained from "upgrading" to Win2K, at least as an OS for a TS-dedicated
>>computer. My copy of Win XP, bought some time ago,
>>remains unwrapped and languishing in my drawer, awaiting any hint that
>>Win98 is not carrying its prescribed load under TS. When that occurs,
>>I'll post it on our newsgroup promptly and take my licks.
>>Until then, its "Win98: Onward and Downward" for me.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>
>>Richard
>>
>>_Craig wrote:
>>
>> > There are some people here who stubbornly won't upgrade from Windows
>> > 98. If you are one of them, then no one can help you. You should
>> > have windows 2000 with at least 512 megs of RAM. In my opinion,
>> > TS2000i owners have no excuse otherwise.
|