Hi Pete,Wow, pretty heavy reply and very technical - far beyond my ken I'm afraid but I can comment on a few things...
<<Did you get loads of problems on Win98SE? >>
Don't think I ever had that one. I moved from Win98 to Me and despite yours and others bad feelings about that version I found it reasonably stable. BSOD? yes, on occasions but nothing that really made me think I should dump it.
<<You are probably now using very stable nVidia drivers which have been debugged over hundreds of versions ...>>
Well, if you remember I'm using the Omega drivers because of their exceptional quality. These are based on nVidia's of course but even if I wasn't using Omega's I probably wouldn't try every version of driver that nVidia produce. I'd get nothing done!
<<But I really cannot remember the last system crash or BSOD I had on Win98SE and I've been running it full time 6.5 days per week on 5 machines, since it came out.>>
That's a recommendation if ever I heard one. I hope that I'll be able to say the same about XP in a couple of years.
<<I think you'll find that was down simply to resource allocations, not memory.>>
Oh, okay, I'll bow to your greater knowledge but the tool quite clearly states "Physical Memory - Available". There are values shown for Kernel Memory and the size of the Page File (swap file) is also shown. Altogether better than anything Me gave me. I never bought any 3rd party utilities for memory management - I suppose if I had things would have been more stable.
<<I'm claiming that Win98SE, and only Win98SE, is/was the best (and for FS and most other such programs, the fastest) O/S Microsoft has yet produced.>>
I think users of NT4 might contest that claim. Perhaps you meant for home users? Not FS-friendly of course but still very stable as me and many of my colleagues at work will vouch for. WE're moving to Windows2000 soon so that should be interesting but outside the purpose of this discussion of course.
Regards,
Ray Proudfoot,
Cheshire, England