"rstlne" wrote in message
...

"Peter de Vroomen" wrote in message
...
The problem is that it's running Microsoft software.

Install one of the Operating Systems that Microsoft created in
co-operation
with a serious company, like IBM. That would therefore be: Windows NT,
Windows 2000 or Windows XP. Although with Windows XP, Microsoft decided
to
tamper the one thing they hadn't really dared to lay their fingers on
upto
then: the Windows kernel. Therefore, Windows XP might also be unstable.
But
I don't know for sure. There's no reason to prefer Windows XP over
Windows
2000 (unless you see your expensive computer as a toy), so I haven't
installed it yet. I am trying to stall that decision as long as
possible,
until Microsoft devises some new trick to force me to update (i.e. a new
service pack that makes my computer respond twice as slow, or 'buy' a
law
that forces people to only use their newest products).

PeterV

P.S. It's so fun to bash Microsoft, especially because whatever you say
about them, there's allways at least half the truth in it :+).


I dont think a 200mmx chip is the ideal thing for win2k or winNT. He
should
stick with win98se if possible. If we look at win2k and winnt and winxp
then we see they were perfect for some of the worst worm/virii to grow..
98se only had one major problem, that was the ability for a user to do a
DoS
attack on it and the pc just bluescreen.. I would guess that a 98se
machine
is probably pretty safe these days too, most virii being spread are going
to
be target'd for xp or 2k and no for an outdated os



If he has enough RAM then Win2k would be fine on that PC. My laptop is a PII
with only 96mb and I run 98SE on that, it's been pretty solid and works well
for what it is, but 9x is more prone to being broken by shoddy applications.
2k is much more solid but requires more RAM, XP is mostly just 2k with a
bunch of extra crap and requires even more RAM.