Windows 2000 or 1998

Are you planing to upgrade only 1 PC, or you have a network? The answer depends on your setup, but always upgrading from old OS to NEW is better...
First you should consider the following,
Minimum Hardware Specifications:
Pentium 133 MHz Processor
64 MB RAM
2 GB Hard Disk Drive

We can mention lot of Benefits, but I think the main one for a sigle user that:
1. Lot of drivers available
2. Multiple Language support
3. Built on NT technology
and more and more......I think it is better to visit Microsoft site and read about it.

Good Luck.

It depends what you want to use the machine for. Providing you have adequate hardware then Windows 2000 will provide a more stable environment than Win 98. However if you predominately use your machine for games then Windows 98 has more support - italso supports a greater range of hardware than Windows 2000 does at present. Windows 2000 will eventually support all home and business applications, but at the moment you need to make a decision based upon what you use your machine for - Games 98, office applications 2000.

HHmm, I don't really agree with the first answer(sorry dude). Its not always best to jump on the latest OS. It all depends on what your main reason for using the PC is. If its used primarily for Word Processing or surfing the web or something like that 98 is just as good as 2000. 2000 has more overhead and therefore requires more hardware, by that I mean faster processor and gobs of RAM. The though of running 2000 on a p133 with 64 megs of ram is a joke. I have nothing against 2000 and use it myself and I do like it, but don't upgrade for the sake of upgrading. Now if you do alot of networking with VPN's and terminal servers and such, or if you work in a position were knowing 2000 will benefit you then do the upgrade...

The last two answers are correct. Windows 2000 is more a business OS than a home OS. Microsoft has a knowlege base article on the subject located here:

http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q256/0/70.ASP

Hope this helps.......

I agree with the previous. Sorry to the guy in the first post, but a P133 w/64 meg won't do it for 2000. I recommend at least a PII with 128Meg. My experience is take what MS Recommends and double it, that will probably due in most instances. Keep in mind that 2000 is an upgrade to NT, not 9x. If you're not running NT now, then ask yourself, why do I need to run NT. True 2000 is better with notebooks and plug and pray than NT (which really had no PnP support w/o 3rd party). If you're doing alot of traveling with a notebook, then 2000 is the way to go. It handles remote users much bettern than 9x or NT4. If your primary goal is to just do word processing and games and some multimedia stuff, stick with 9x. Wouldn't go to ME though,used it and it's crap. It's 98 minus some bug fixes with a 2000 interface. Very kludgy.

This question was auto closed due to inactivity