In this thread: http://ftp.avsim.com/dcforum/DCForumID8/14148.htmlthere is much mention of "better stability" with XP over 98 and ME and I'm wondering what is meant by that.I'm running Windows 98 SE on three computers that are networked together and don't have problems with any of them. They are all on 24/7 and have been for several years, the latest being an Athlon 1.33G T'bird that I bought about a year and a half ago. I don't get any "blue screens of death", no crash to desktop in FS2002 and everything in general works fine. I have thought about upgrading to XP but I subscribe to the theory "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" and I just think I'd be kind of stupid to change now. The only problem I have is some mild stuttering when taxiing around any airport. I just don't think that changing operating systems will improve that.I have PC2100 512M ram, a Ti4200 with 128M and an A7M266 Motherboard.

It usually means you don't gotta reboot every few hours. My comptuer is rock solid with XP, rarely gotta reboot. I could easily keep my comp running weeks on end with XP, but since I have this comp in my bedroom, its loud and it makes it hard to sleep :) . Even my old Krap6-400 with 192MB RAM is stable in XP. I never got past 6 hours before WinMe needed a reboot.

Thanks for the reply Zack. I almost never have to reboot for any reason. I might better stay with 98SE.

Basically "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". If your existing system is stable then don't touch it until you have to. When I had WinMe on my system, I was rebooting many times a day. Now with XP, I reboot a few times a month. Keep your system as is until it starts having problems.

Thanks Craig.

Frankly I never ran into stability problems with Win 98SE(besides USB never working worth a hoot), or WinME and now WinXP. I run a network at home and my BOX runs WinXP Pro and the other boxes run WinME, no problems....some programs crash but WinXP never does and there is never a need to reboot. I love it as far as performance with FS2002 well what can I say even the Intel P4 3.06mhz will sigh with all that we ask of this program, (just kidding I know) XP is very capable and stable I am in love with it.Tony

Well i have tried them all and MS says XP is supposed to be stable but i rate it about the same as win98se im now useing win2000 pro and i have never had it go blue screen or crash on me.

Hi Tony,I've never done anything with USB so I wouldn't know about that. I would like to try XP especially for the rollback feature but I'm very hesitant.

Ocassionally I have a day long period here and there where XP just makes me tear my hair out. Otherwise it's been very satisfying, especially having upgraded from WinME. Could it be? Does my computer get PMS?For your current network Win98 would be fine but if you plan on upgrading it you'll need to move on up to 2000 or XP.

Don't get me wrong - I love XP it has never caused me a problem once, by contrast I had to completely rebuild WIN98 at least 3 times. BUT, if you have 3 PC's networked using WIN 98 and everything works fine I would stick with it until something forces you to upgrade. My reasoning is this: Microsoft will expect you to buy a XP licence for each PC that you own. OK, they expected that with 98 et al, but XP has Windows Activation. I don't know how much information is sent to MS when you activate your copy of XP, but it could be a potential can of worms if you only buy one copy of XP and install it on three different computers.

We are comparing apples and oranges here, because what your systems are DOING; what hardware and drivers are involved; what poorly-behaved games and programs you run; etc. etc. etc... is much more important to stability, than what OS you are running. (Even different versions of the same utility... example Netscape browser... will affect your systems differently. The sequence of events... the extent of memory used during that sequence... which of those programs left how much leaked memory unresolved... all this will affect stability) I can only say that for myself, XP (pro) is more stable on a day-in-day-out basis, on a system that is routinely shut-down-and-booted-daily. BUT, it is different hardware. Though the XP system is doing more stuff, such as scanning, that the 98 never did. And, actually, the 98 system seems stable now, too, but is that because a lot of tasks, and some of the peripherals, have been off-loaded from it onto the XP?"aint broke dont fix it" is always appropriate philosophy. I certainly would not have upgraded the original system to XP just for the OS (still haven't)... but I took it on as the "latest available" when I got my new one.Art.

Thanks for all the response. I think I'll just stay where I'm at for the time being. Maybe on my next computer upgrade... sometime around October next year.