|
Author
|
Topic: Blowing the Whistler
|
zippy
Member with a member bigger than the member with a member
|
posted 04-16-2001 17:24
   
the idea is that they're trying to combine two different lines of operating systems. 95, 98, and ME are all along the same line. one is just an "improvement" over the other. win2k was spawned from the winNT kernel, which is more business oriented, although i find that win2k is a great desktop OS as well. win2k was originally supposed to be the one OS that would bring together the power and stability of NT and the ease of use of 95/98 (and this is the case, in my opinion). No one knows why winME was released at almost the same freakin time, but it's garbage. However, microsoft has now decided to release winXP as the one OS that businesses and users can use, and this can be seen in the user interface. Anyone who's tried winXP will tell you, there are actually two very different user interface modes. the default looks a whole lot like win2k, and the "granny" mode is just that.. it's an interface your grandmother could use. That's the mode that you most often see screenshots of. Unfortunately, MS also bundled lots of other crap with XP that amounts to nothing more than a turn-off on the same level as seeing your mom in a lace teddy. product activation and the tight integration of copyrighted music formats is a big big no-no, so i'm sticking with win2k, which is after all everytyhing it was ever supposed to be. IP: Logged |
Bitchgoddess
battin' .500
|
posted 04-16-2001 18:09
ME is definitely not crap. It works great on my system, and it's easy to use. NT is a pain in my ass, the Army uses it a lot, and I got very used to the damned thing crashing ever time I tried to do a spreadsheet for the 1SG. Of course, the Army has a contract with Dell, and most of the problems were that those computers are crap, but having NT installed sure didn't help any. I ended up formatting and installing 98 on my office computer. It worked a helluva lot better. IP: Logged |
eod
TREAT MERIGHT!
|
posted 04-16-2001 18:52
Me isn't complete crap but it isn't any better than Win98SE. Unless you take advantage of the restore feature it is the same shit as 98SE. Personally I love Win2kPro, as my desktop OS. Stable.. Very Stable, as an OS should be, don't settle for WinME, use something that works.Plus XP will be all subscriber based. I'll be damned if I pay yearly fees for an OS that doesn't do shit. IP: Logged |
Demon-of-Elru
TFC Bitch
|
posted 04-16-2001 20:03
I am partial to windows 3.11. That's what I used to use until '99. On a nice P60 and a whopping(and upgraded 16MB RAM) add a 407MB HD and my old system ROCKED!IP: Logged |
zippy
Member with a member bigger than the member with a member
|
posted 04-16-2001 21:36
i'm glad at least one other person sees the light regarding win2k. i use advanced server edition myself, but it's all the same thing once you get the dumbass services disabled and free up some ram. i dont need to broadcast asf streams over a network anyway, so it's no skin off my penis.as for ME, i've been told, and have read in some publications, that it has some issues supporting hardware that worked under 98. i dont understand why it would do this though since it is just a tidied up version of win98. go figure. my download of redhat linux 7.0 is 3% complete. GO JOE IP: Logged |
Jimbo
1 dr3w j00 4 p1ggy!
|
posted 04-17-2001 00:57
Win2K r0xx0rz my world. NT4 with the welcome addition of native FAT32 support and DirectX7 (now DirectX8) and USB support.What could be better? :beatific smile: IP: Logged |
zippy
Member with a member bigger than the member with a member
|
posted 04-17-2001 19:55
the one thing that would be even better in win2k is *good* support for 3d applications. i take a solid 30% performance hit in 3d games over a similar system running win98.err, two things... a fully customizable user interface. IP: Logged |
Jimbo
1 dr3w j00 4 p1ggy!
|
posted 04-17-2001 21:46
Really? 30% performance hit?I didn't see any performance hit when I went from 98SE to Win2K on an original GeForce. Hell, with my GeForce 2 GTS Pro running Win2K, I played Unreal Tournament in 1600x1200 without any perceptible framedrop - every ONCE in a while the fps would drop to the very high 20's, but most of the time it stayed 40's and up. Pretty fucking sweet. IP: Logged |
zippy
Member with a member bigger than the member with a member
|
posted 04-18-2001 00:08
try running madonion 2000. you'll quickly notice that your performance is a lot lower than exactly identical rigs running win98. for the record, i'm sporting an athlon 850 and a geforce2 mx. i guess it *could* be related to the via chipset, but i doubt it. IP: Logged |
eod
TREAT MERIGHT!
|
posted 04-18-2001 03:56
Zippy: It isn't the chipset, it is well known that drivers for Win2k/NT4 suck ass. While my card still performs fine under win2k, companies don't put the same effort into drivers for win2k/nt as they do for win98. Why should they, most of their customers still use 98. IP: Logged |
Demon-of-Elru
TFC Bitch
|
posted 04-18-2001 12:40
Mmmm Unreal TournamentIP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
PenIs Forum
