Windows '98 vs. Windows 2000

> Ultimately it's never advisable to upgrade simply for the sake of it, so if you are happy with performance under Windows '98, leave it be.

Oh I remember back years ago doing the very stupid upgrade of my localized 98 SE to some 180-day trial of English version of 2000 which was bundled with special release of PCWorld Computer magazine. The end result was a system that look like it was half translated - Polish language strings were popping around in weirdest places; tho, nothing was lost as translation, terminology used in 98 was really poor and actually improved later with Windows 2000.

> But going for something that doesn't fall apart every five minutes, such as Linux or BeOS

The R5 and R5.1 were stable for me but since I had no Internet at home, the OS was barely useful with bundled software but still interesting to try. Even Mandrake Linux I've tried next was "tamed" - beside the unrecognisable Fortemedia FM801 chipset of my soundcard.

For some reason the NT to 2000 transition broke all of my ASP Classic pages. Had to make small changes (I can't remember what) to all of the .asp pages even though there shouldn't have been any difference.