OT - RAM utilities -> XP sucks? -> ME is worse?

[Fyron]

I almost never have problems running games under 2000.

[Gandalph]

2000 will run games and supports DX8.1, but it has VERY limited peripheral support. If a game works better with a wheel, joystick, or gamepad, you can forget running it on 2000. That is one of the main differences between 2000 and XP. XP supports most of the latest gaming peripherals. On my XP system, for example, I have a Force Feedback Racing wheel, FF joystick, and a FF gamepad, and all of them work excellently with games that support them. Rogue Sqadron, for instance is very enjoyable when you can feel the missile hit to your X-Wing while chasing down a Tie Bomber.

[Fyron]

Well that requires you to feel that it is necessary to use a lot of peripherals to enjoy a game.

But fisher price XP still sucks in general.

[Baron Munchausen]

Yep, Win98 seems to be the 'sweet spot' for most Users. I have often seen people say on various 'support Boards' that you should not bother with anything after Win98 SE. I wonder what the real statistics are for the current installed base of Windows systems. Is Win 98 still holding a larger chunk of the systems than any of the newer Versions? Is XP going to convince people to upgrade with its combination of Win/NT stability and Win98 compatible 'consumer' features? Or will the 'subscription' features spook people away from it? I think we're reaching a crucial point in the history of the Microsoft Empire. If people are not willing to upgrade to XP there may be an opening for someone/something else. If not Linux then maybe the rumoured "Intel Version" of Apple's OS X.

[Fyron]

2000 looks just like 98 to me, but with added features and more crash-resistance. And everything I used on my computer under 98se works fine under 2000.

[mlmbd]

OK, OK, Imperator Fyron. I grant you your point about WIN 2000. I still prefer 98SE.

But, I hope we still agree WIN XP SUCKS!!!

[Fyron]

Yes, fisher price XP does indeed suck.