Upgrade from Windows 98SE to XP Pro

[Dragan Cvetkovic]

[email]dscheffold@aol.com[/email] (DScheffold) writes:

> I am considering upgrading to XP Pro from 98 SE but I have a few
> concerns.

Listened too much to Microsoft "upgrade to XP Pro" commercial? :-) It is
interesting that their message there is that everything else is "not good
(enough)". As if most of the people won't be upgrading from an MS OS.

> I am
> running a P3 650MB with Intel processor. I have 512MB of RAM. Now the sticky
> part. I have a Nikon 2000 Film Scanner and a Nikon Flatbed Scanner that both
> operate off of an Adaptec SCSI controller. I had a difficult time installing
> both scanners but they are now operating fine. I am concerned when I install
> the upgrade that the SCSI devices will not operate. Has anyone upgraded with
> similar conditions?

I know that XP has dropped a lot of (obsolete?) hardware support so if your
SCSI controller is one of these, you better stick with 98SE. You have to
tell us which Adaptec SCSI controller that is (they make/made a lot of
different models) or find for yourself if that one is still
supported. Check if the drivers are available for your scanners.

Bye, Dragan

--
Dragan Cvetkovic,

To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

[ajacobs2]

WE went to Win 2000 Pro and XP with the 4000 scanner and neither worked.
You should have concerns, It doesn't like either and Nikon support in this
issue is a closed door.
Finally we split the system loaded another machine with Win 98, some fast
drives and lots of ram, only the scanner and photoshop, runs like a jewel.


"DScheffold" <dscheffold@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030710205928.29939.00000182@mb-m03.aol.com...

> I am considering upgrading to XP Pro from 98 SE but I have a few concerns.

I am

> running a P3 650MB with Intel processor. I have 512MB of RAM. Now the

sticky

> part. I have a Nikon 2000 Film Scanner and a Nikon Flatbed Scanner that

both

> operate off of an Adaptec SCSI controller. I had a difficult time

installing

> both scanners but they are now operating fine. I am concerned when I

install

> the upgrade that the SCSI devices will not operate. Has anyone upgraded

with

> similar conditions?
>
> Thanks,
> Don
>

[Matt]

"DScheffold" <dscheffold@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030710205928.29939.00000182@mb-m03.aol.com...

> I am considering upgrading to XP Pro from 98 SE but I have a few concerns.

I am

> running a P3 650MB with Intel processor. I have 512MB of RAM. Now the

sticky

> part. I have a Nikon 2000 Film Scanner and a Nikon Flatbed Scanner that

both

> operate off of an Adaptec SCSI controller. I had a difficult time

installing

> both scanners but they are now operating fine. I am concerned when I

install

> the upgrade that the SCSI devices will not operate. Has anyone upgraded

with

> similar conditions?
>
> Thanks,
> Don

Only upgrade if your motherboard and devices connected to it will have
drivers for XP. Otherwise you will be sitting in cold water after the
upgrade.

Matt

[Alan Rutlidge]

"Matt" <mkrebill@student.lssu.edu> wrote in message
news:lIoPa.31409$ye4.23018@sccrnsc01...

>
> "DScheffold" <dscheffold@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20030710205928.29939.00000182@mb-m03.aol.com...

> > I am considering upgrading to XP Pro from 98 SE but I have a few

concerns.

> I am

> > running a P3 650MB with Intel processor. I have 512MB of RAM. Now the

> sticky

> > part. I have a Nikon 2000 Film Scanner and a Nikon Flatbed Scanner that

> both

> > operate off of an Adaptec SCSI controller. I had a difficult time

> installing

> > both scanners but they are now operating fine. I am concerned when I

> install

> > the upgrade that the SCSI devices will not operate. Has anyone upgraded

> with

> > similar conditions?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Don

>
> Only upgrade if your motherboard and devices connected to it will have
> drivers for XP. Otherwise you will be sitting in cold water after the
> upgrade.
>
> Matt
>

I had a similar problem with upgrading from Win98SE to XP using a Canoscan
600 flatbed that operated via an Adaptec SCSI card.
I could get a driver for the Adaptec card to work okay under XP and
downloaded the Twain driver for the scanner from the Canon site which
claimed it was for 2000 / XP (XP said it wasn't a XP verified driver - but
that is commonplace).
After install and a bit of stuffing around XP would recognise the SCSI card
and the Twain driver but the Canon ScanCraft program would not operate under
XP even with all the updates and patches installed.

In the end I resinstalled Win98SE on the PC, installed a network card, built
a new kick-arse Pentium 4 PC with all the fruit, installed XP Pro on it and
networked the two machines. In reality it was the most economical solution
considering the initial cost of the scanner and the film adapter unit I had
purchased for it.

This problem of no updated drivers, incompatible programs and hardware that
becomes obsolete witin months of reaching the marketplace is indemic in the
IT world. Sometimes I often question the real value of buying upmarket high
priced peripherals unless you are going to work the arse off them in a very
short space of time so you actually get value for money.

My 2c worth.

Cheers,
Alan

[Randall Ainsworth]

If it works now, don't screw it up by going to XP.

[JPS@no.komm]

In message <100720032036147608%rag@nospam.techline.com>,
Randall Ainsworth <rag@nospam.techline.com> wrote:

>If it works now, don't screw it up by going to XP.

I don't know of a single person in real life who regrets going from
Win9x to XP. The general consensus is that "everything just works now".
Only a few isolated, vocal people like yourself bitch about XP.

XP has never crashed on me once it was up (it has failed to boot with
the CPU speed overclocked too far), and almost everyone I know who uses
it has never seen the OS crash.

It recognized most older hardware and uses it without any user
intervention. I installed my copy of XP for up to 30 days without
activation on about a dozen different hardware configurations of spare
parts I have lying around, and only in a couple of cases has it needed a
driver to use a piece of hardware (always non-essential hardware).
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>

><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

[Matt]

"Alan Rutlidge" <rutlidge*nO-sPaM*@mail.iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:3f0e2773$0$23102$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net. au...

> This problem of no updated drivers, incompatible programs and hardware

that

> becomes obsolete witin months of reaching the marketplace is indemic in

the

> IT world. Sometimes I often question the real value of buying upmarket

high

> priced peripherals unless you are going to work the arse off them in a

very

> short space of time so you actually get value for money.
>
> My 2c worth.
>
> Cheers,
> Alan

I believe you nailed the lid on the coffin. Right on. Peripherals don't last
that long however if I could make one final statement. If you have been
using the peripherals ever since NT4 came out then you might have a better
chance of getting them to work under XP than 9X. I said "might"... : )

Matt

[John O.]

all snipped

>

DON'T DO IT!! RUN AWAY... RUN AWAY... YOU'LL REGRET IT IF YOU DO.
--
John O.
There is no slack in light attack.

[Bart van der Wolf]

"DScheffold" <dscheffold@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030710205928.29939.00000182@mb-m03.aol.com...

> I am considering upgrading to XP Pro from 98 SE but I have a few concerns.

I am

> running a P3 650MB with Intel processor. I have 512MB of RAM. Now the

sticky

> part. I have a Nikon 2000 Film Scanner and a Nikon Flatbed Scanner that

both

> operate off of an Adaptec SCSI controller. I had a difficult time

installing

> both scanners but they are now operating fine. I am concerned when I

install

> the upgrade that the SCSI devices will not operate. Has anyone upgraded

with

> similar conditions?

Update your various drivers and BIOS to the latest (XP compatible if
available) versions. Uninstall virus scanners and such. Upgrading from WinME
to XP Pro went smooth for me. Some drivers were automatically replaced by
WHQL approved versions.

Get the latest ASPI layers from Adaptec:
[url]http://www.adaptec.com/worldwide/support/drivers_by_product.html?cat=/Product/ASPI-4.70[/url]

The ASPI Layers are needed for the LS2000, so you must add them after
upgrading to XP.

Bart

[Frankhartx]

>From: [email]dscheffold@aol.com[/email] (DScheffold)

>I am considering upgrading to XP Pro from 98 SE but I have a few

Do not upgrade to xp pro but to xp home editon-pro sets a new record for freeze
ups and incompatability. When I upgraded my old computer to pro i made a wise
decision--i kept 98 and thus had a choice of os's--thank god-that saved my
butt.

[Tom Scales]

Frank,

Your experience is contrary to the rest of the world. XP Pro is quite
reliable and running well on literally millions of machines. Large companies
choose it because of its reliability.

Personally, I could go straight to Pro, not Home. Why limit yourself.

Tom
"Frankhartx" <frankhartx@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20030711061846.29240.00000157@mb-m15.news.cs.com...

> >From: [email]dscheffold@aol.com[/email] (DScheffold)

>

> >I am considering upgrading to XP Pro from 98 SE but I have a few

>
> Do not upgrade to xp pro but to xp home editon-pro sets a new record for

freeze

> ups and incompatability. When I upgraded my old computer to pro i made a

wise

> decision--i kept 98 and thus had a choice of os's--thank god-that saved my
> butt.

[Randall Ainsworth]

> Your experience is contrary to the rest of the world. XP Pro is quite

> reliable and running well on literally millions of machines. Large companies
> choose it because of its reliability.
>
> Personally, I could go straight to Pro, not Home. Why limit yourself.

Why pay the extra bucks if you're not going to connect to a domain or
use any of the other "special" features of Pro? And to upgrade over
the top of 98 is asking for trouble.

[Ron Hunter]

Frankhartx wrote:

>>From: [email]dscheffold@aol.com[/email] (DScheffold)

>
>

>>I am considering upgrading to XP Pro from 98 SE but I have a few

>
>
> Do not upgrade to xp pro but to xp home editon-pro sets a new record for freeze
> ups and incompatability. When I upgraded my old computer to pro i made a wise
> decision--i kept 98 and thus had a choice of os's--thank god-that saved my
> butt.

Interesting, since WinXP Home and Pro are the SAME, except for addition
of some networking modules and a utility to control security settings.

[Ron Hunter]

Randall Ainsworth wrote:

>>Your experience is contrary to the rest of the world. XP Pro is quite
>>reliable and running well on literally millions of machines. Large companies
>>choose it because of its reliability.
>>
>>Personally, I could go straight to Pro, not Home. Why limit yourself.

>
>
> Why pay the extra bucks if you're not going to connect to a domain or
> use any of the other "special" features of Pro? And to upgrade over
> the top of 98 is asking for trouble.

THAT is why I suspect many people have trouble with XP.

[Randall Ainsworth]

> THAT is why I suspect many people have trouble with XP.


Any time you put one version of an operating system on top of another,
PC or Mac, you're asking for trouble. Especially when making a
generational jump from 98 to XP. You just inherit whatever problems
you might already have (and not know it).

[Randall Ainsworth]

> I have two computers, side by side. One with Win98SE and this one with

> WinXP Home. WinXP has NEVER crashed in the 8 months it has been up, and
> it is up all the time 24/7. Win98SE crashes 1 to 5 times daily! The
> ONLY reason WinXP isn't on both computers is that HP claims the old one
> might not be compatible and I have old hardware, such as a scanner, that
> does not have XP drivers.

Let me sit at the Xp machine and I'll lock it up with two keystrokes.
Gimme the 98 one and I'll make it work right. :-)

[Frankhartx]

>rom: Randall Ainsworth [email]rag@nospam.techline.com[/email]

>Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital

>Any time you put one version of an operating system on top of another,
>PC or Mac, you're asking for trouble. Especially when making a
>generational jump from 98 to XP. You just inherit whatever problems
>you might already have (and not know it).

Not on top but side by side. The two can coexist quite nicely as seperate and
distinct choices xp pro would simply not work with my printer but I could
switch over to 98 and have no problem, xphome worked with the printer from the
get go. Takes up some disk space but i think it's a good idea to have another
os available if needed

[Abrasha]

Randall Ainsworth wrote:

>

> > I have two computers, side by side. One with Win98SE and this one with
> > WinXP Home. WinXP has NEVER crashed in the 8 months it has been up, and
> > it is up all the time 24/7. Win98SE crashes 1 to 5 times daily! The
> > ONLY reason WinXP isn't on both computers is that HP claims the old one
> > might not be compatible and I have old hardware, such as a scanner, that
> > does not have XP drivers.

>
> Let me sit at the Xp machine and I'll lock it up with two keystrokes.
> Gimme the 98 one and I'll make it work right. :-)

Which two keystrokes?
--
Abrasha
[url]http://www.abrasha.com[/url]

[NoOneYouKnow]

"Frankhartx" <frankhartx@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20030711133257.01470.00000199@mb-m26.news.cs.com...

> >rom: Randall Ainsworth [email]rag@nospam.techline.com[/email]
> >Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital

>

> >Any time you put one version of an operating system on top of another,
> >PC or Mac, you're asking for trouble. Especially when making a
> >generational jump from 98 to XP. You just inherit whatever problems
> >you might already have (and not know it).

>
> Not on top but side by side. The two can coexist quite nicely as seperate

and

> distinct choices xp pro would simply not work with my printer but I could
> switch over to 98 and have no problem, xphome worked with the printer from

the

> get go. Takes up some disk space but i think it's a good idea to have

another

> os available if needed

Ummm, XP Home and XP Pro are essentially the same OS and use the exact same
drivers, so if Home worked with your printer, Pro will too.

---JRE---

[Tom Scales]

Now that's just BS.

XP is vastly superior. It's not even close
"Randall Ainsworth" <rag@nospam.techline.com> wrote in message
news:110720030911204943%rag@nospam.techline.com...

> > I have two computers, side by side. One with Win98SE and this one with
> > WinXP Home. WinXP has NEVER crashed in the 8 months it has been up, and
> > it is up all the time 24/7. Win98SE crashes 1 to 5 times daily! The
> > ONLY reason WinXP isn't on both computers is that HP claims the old one
> > might not be compatible and I have old hardware, such as a scanner, that
> > does not have XP drivers.

>
> Let me sit at the Xp machine and I'll lock it up with two keystrokes.
> Gimme the 98 one and I'll make it work right. :-)