MS OS - System Resources

Hi All,

Recently I have been having problems at work using Macromedia Homesite 5. Homesite is well known for sucking up resources like there is no tomorrow. I am running Win 98 SE on a 800 Mhz computer with 256 Megs of Memory. Recently Homesite has been crashing like crazy, and the resource monitor shows that all my resources are used up when Homesite decides to crash. It's not the memory or CPU usage that is being used up, it is the system resources. I've been doing some research on message boards and such and someone who had been having the exact same problem made a post saying he upgraded to Win 2000 Pro and it handles resources much better. Homesite stopped crashing for him.

So basically I want to upgrade the OS on my computer from Win 98 to something else. I can't use Unix or Linux, it has to be a MS OS. So basically my question is which OS should I upgrade to?

My options are XP, 2000, or ME. I want to upgrade to the OS that handles resources the best. Any suggestions? Thanks.

I like 2k. Stay away from ME. Xp is good too, just that almost mac like gui bothers me.

Win 2k is indeed a good option, XP is a bigger bitch and ME has problems handling system resources.

2000. Don't even think about ME. That makes 98 look nice. I personally can't stand XP either. Been having to many problems with it on the network. I like 2000, or 98 if I have to use microsoft, and like you said, 98 has major resource problems.

Definitely 2k or XP...avoid ME like the plague...I'd say go with XP, people tend to disagree with me but I think it's got the edge over 2k...

Me too soulman, some clown at work installed XP on his laptop and we have an NT 4 server and neither I or the other technician had a clue on how to get it on the network.

hehe...i feels for ya Jared_c...the reason i started running win2k is because coldfusion studio (which is homesite's bigger brother) would kill my resources at least 10 times a day on win98...i have never had a problem with it on 2k...in fact...2k is the most stable os m$ has ever put out...ok so that might not mean a whole lot...but i have no complaints about it's operation...(constantly patching huge holes...yes...operation...no)

me won't solve your problems at all...it is based on win9x core and has all the same problems...your options are really 2k or xp...and as i've said many times...i won't touch xp until at least sp1...we're on win2k sp2 and a lot of the holes are plugged...sure they're be more...but not as many as in xp...

Quote:

---

some clown at work installed XP on his laptop and we have an NT 4 server and neither I or the other technician had a clue on how to get it on the network.

---

Foc...if the clown installed xp home...you WON"T be able to join it to the domain...you can only do that with xp pro...

Win2k definately!!!

Thanks for the info everyone... We made a phone call and XP Pro will be in the office in a few days. I would prefer W2K, but the powers that be are bringing in XP.

Thanks again for all the info.

Just my two cents, which is only a personal opinion....doesn't mean quite as much as some of these other guys who have a lot more experience. But I also would suggest Win 2K, as I use it at home, and ME also....Win 2K handles a lot more that you throw at it than ME will. I would definitely not go with ME, because you're going to have the same probs with it as you do with 98. XP I don't know anything about, except I keep reading patch this, security problem that....so I would go with 2K.
:cool:

MS-DOS 6.22 :)

oops...i mean...Win2k....yep..that's what i meant to say...

I agree with just about everyone here. ME SUCK BIG TIME. xp is cool and nice if you like multimedia, but 2k is the best for application critical processes.