Upgrading the OS

[grandpa]

I'm getting ready to upgrade this Win98 Box (hooo-ray!)

The new OS will be W2K Pro. I've done this same sort of upgrade for a friend, and only once before. I have a couple of real concerns.

This box is used exclusively for the business, so messing something up could be a disaster.

We probably have a few applications not designed for W2K, right now there is only 1 that I can point to with any certainty, and I do have an alternate for that.

I know that W2K "will" work with FAT32, and I'm tempted to let it run that way, again because of concern for critical apps that may not run under NTFS.

I'm also considering installing a new hard drive, put W2K on that, and run the old apps off the current drive, and/or create a dual boot machine. Good or bad idea?

Suggestions, thoughts, or experiences appreciated.

Thanks
grandpa

[txbakers]

I don't like dual boot machines. Never felt comfortable that something wasn't going to leak from one to the other.

[snowman]

Microsoft has dumped support for Win 95.

They will dump support for Win 98.

They will, in the future, dump support for Win?.

Are there alternatives? Why upgrade? It only perpetuates the cycle.

[pendanticist]

NTFS, NTFS, NTFS, NTFS, NTFS.

I've been running W2Pro for 'bout six years and aside from lacking driver availability for a (then) new RCA digital camera (SanDisk provided the solution via USB), I have had no problems at all. And as long as your needs are too far into the 'outlier' category, you should have nothing but happing working and surfing for a long time to come.

NTFS, NTFS, NTFS, NTFS, NTFS.

[grandpa]

Snowman,
Why upgrade?

Win98 only recognizes half the available memory in this machine.

I'm tired of rebooting 6 times a day, every day.

I'd love to be able to print a catalog *and* work on the web pages at the same time.

It's chic.

I'm eager to perform several security upgrades the minute the new OS is running :) (not!)

I don't think it's possible to convert this box to a Mac.

I'm guessing you're not a fan of Win. I'm not particularly fond of them, at times, but I don't have time to learn UNIX *or* to teach it to the boss. (We both rely heavily on this box).

pendantist,

It *seems* you might be suggesting to go ahead and use the NTFS structure. Personally, I'm still of a mindset to get another drive, load it up with W2K and format it NTFS, and migrate everything over on an *as needed* basis. Maybe I'm just being overly cautious, but only because this is not *my* machine. If it were, I'd go for it in a heartbeat.

grandpa

[pendanticist]

;)

[sidyadav]

grandpa, if I may ask - why win2k? why not XP?

Sid

[grandpa]

sidyadav

2 reasons, maybe 3...

I've used W2k, familarity.

One of these days (probably won't happen, but..) I want to set up a server - training the boss to use W2k will make an easier migration to server.

Software compatablilty issues with XP. Seems like I've heard it's bigger issue with XP than with W2K. The accounting package I use was pre-XP and post W2K. My copy of NAV is good for either. Some of the software I expect to quit functioning, period.

[bcolflesh]

Personally, I'm still of a mindset to get another drive, load it up with W2K and format it NTFS, and migrate everything over on an *as needed* basis.

This is a sound and logical strategy.

[plumsauce]

convert the filesystem after installation.

look at the help for convert.exe or type

convert /? at the dos prompt.

the command goes like this:

convert c: /fs:ntfs /v

the os will prompt you to reboot to get the
conversion done.