[HumanClay]

Sorry for posting so many topics lately.

I was just wondering how many of you use Windows 2000? And, are you happy with it? Is it faster, more stable, etc?

I run a P3-700, 128mb RAM, 27gb, 19" Monitor.. etc. And obviously, I use my system primarily for Graphic Design. Would installing Windows 2000 be beneficial to me at all, or should I just stick with Windows 98 SE?

Any information would be greatly appreciated.. I've gotten mixed signals regarding Windows 2000.

Thanks very much guys and gals.
HumanClay

[above]

Sorry, I don't use win2k, but you gave me an idea for a "hardware/OS section" in the FAQ. And there has already been a post like this, I think, and their were really mixed opinions. So I would expect the same.

[zapman]

I use win2k, win98

You really dont need to upgrade to win2000, Sure its a little more stable, more faster, nicer looking.

But for your Powerfull system I am sure what your using is now is fine,

Photoshop5.5, 5.0 do work in win2k, also outher top name barns works like LightWave, 3DStudioMax, and most all Adobe prodects work.

Also WACOM tablets work fine.

overall point, dont get it onless you need it.
ZAPmAn

[Shadow]

I got Windows 2000 and i'm loving every minute of it... I got a P2 300 Mhz, 128 Ram, TNT2... everyhting works great, Windows 98 used to lockup sometimes for a min or so everytime i opened a bunch of programs... but not win2k, i can open as many progs as i want and they will still run as supposed to (like you know when you are like cleaning your h/d for example or loading adobe, and listening to winamp at the same time? the sound kinda skips, but in win2k its as smoothe as ever)... and dont worry about your hardware not working... new drivers are coming out every minute

------------------
Shadow
- The Shadow (my homepage)

[This message has been edited by Shadow (edited March 30, 2000).]

[HumanClay]

Thanks to both of you .. any others?

So, is it a LOT faster, is it even noticably faster? Because, I really can stand an extra 1.3 seconds of loadtime to get into Adobe Photoshop if it means I'll have to spend a day or two getting win2k tweaked properly.

HumanClay

[Zeio]

I have a p2-400 256mb ram, tnt2, and I am very pleased with the performance of Windows2000. It is much more stable in my opinion thatn Windows98, and I do notice a performance increase in certain applications, mainly 3d studio max.

As far as adobe products, and other 2d graphics programs, I don't notice any increase, but overall, it does seem much smoother.

If you are doing any 3d modeling I would really suggest using Windows 2000 over 98 for stability and performance in 3d apps.

Basically dont shell out the extra money unless you have money to burn, or you use 3d apps and other demanding applications.

Also, the driver support isnt as strong as Win98, but the only device I havent been able to get drivers for is my Sandisk drive for my digital camera.

-Z

[Snakebyte]

DONT WAIST YOUR TIME WITH IT!!!!
Sure it�s a LITTLE faster and a hell of a lot more stable but it�s memory management sucks some serious balls.
Example: A recent piece of artwork that I have been working on in win 98 required 480Mb�s of ram, after a format and a upgrade to Win2k, however, that same image required 560Mb�s of ram. WHY????
For short, you�ll get more use out for your ram with win 98. Besides win98 isn�t THAT bad. Hell PS has only locked on me just a few times since it�s release.

As for the speed, I used a Dual 525Mhz Celeron 224Mb ram and it wasn�t that much better that 98.

Kevin Moore www.fantasy-anime.org

[Brain]

Personally, I'm waiting for Win2k Millenium or whatever it's called. Seeing Win2k is more for networking and the 'business class', I don't think it would be great for just lowly home users, which Millenium is aiming for. That's what I've heard/read anyway. I pretty much researched the heck outta it cuz I didn't want Dad spending $600 odd bucks on it when I didn't even own Quake 3. So, I talked him out of Win2k, and into Q3A. *grins wickedly*

------------------
Brain
http://brain.gamekey.com/

[beekay-]

actually? i'm all PC... but they're in the process of porting MacOS X to x86 ... and i'll probably be checking that out .. darwin seems like its going to be kicking some ass from what the press has been saying ...

[Danny]

Snakebyte,

you are aware ofcourse that Win98 *doesn't* support that extra little Celeron you've got in your system... Only NT4 and W2k systems can make use of multi processors..

Danny....

------------------
[email protected]

[sfr]

I upgraded from NT4 to Win2k beta 3 a year ago and I'm now running the final release. I've been satisfied, it's NT with better hw support and extra goodies like Direct3D which are nice to have though not essential at all (OpenGL is essential but it was working fine in NT already). After all these years with NT/2k, I wouldn't go back to DOS-based Windows (95/98/ME) for any money... (especially since all my stuff is on NTFS partitions)

Saffron / Sunflower

[assa]

We've bought the final win2k version at my
studio, and I tried this version at my 'home'
computer too. The new hardware support (like
usb, full agp support, strange devices etc.)
is nice, but for some reason my version of
win2k did not work that well.

I had some random crashes, blue terror
screens, memory leaks etc. that did not
happen during my NT4 period of time. Some
drivers were not that stable, and I only
saw a small speed performance. In other words
I was a little disappointed with the new
features, the new system management and esp.
the amount of irritating bugs and crashes.

I've re-installed NT4 at home, tweaked and
customized it, and my system is working
perfectly (I use my g4 mac for usb stuff).

Just try it yourself, and see if YOUR system
is running better.. it might, then again it
might not (hehe.. simply wait for win2k
service pack 10)

assa
-----
Pro artist/designer
Media critic

p.s There's a rumor that NT4 service pack 7.5
has directX 5 support. So no more directblah
blah problem in the near future. (don't ask
me "what happened to service pack7 ?")

[Snakebyte]

Yea Danny I know, Iv removed the second CPU and put it into my other computer. That way it gets an upgrade and puts that cpu to some use.

Kevin Moore www.fantasy-anime.org

[Visigoth]

I have a triple boot setup; Windows NT Server 4.0, Windows 95 OSR 2.5, and Windows 2000 Advanced Server. Out of all of them, I like NT the best...Definately...If you're considering changing your OS to something more stable, and you aren't too worried about playing the latest games; Go with NT 4. I run NT Server 4 because it gets far better disk throughput than Workstation (and I'm too lazy to tweak the registry on Workstation) -- Win2000 has some nice eye-candy.. But it's memory management sucks hairy donkey balls compared to NT Server 4's, so I wouldn't recommend it. =P~

~{V}~

[Chapel]

I run 98 at home and 2k at work. Windows 2k seems more stable than 98, but there isn't much of a speed difference from 98 and 2k. I'd run 2k at home if I didn't play games, but until I hear better reports of games running I'm going to stick with 98.

By the way I have used 2k since the very first beta and even the betas seemed more stable than 98.

------------------
-Chapel
Brian Reber
http://www.geocities.com/chapel_t9/

[This message has been edited by Chapel (edited March 31, 2000).]

[The CYPHER]

The Main thing you have to look at is that stability wise, anyway you go from 98 is a good way. The most stable out of 95/98/NT/2k is NT, then 95, then 2k...I know it's funny that the oldest OS is the most stable, but that's what happens when Microsoft get's to involved in tweeking around with the shell.

On another note, I have a ATA/66 drive on my home system, and when I try to install NT OR 2k I get the same Blue Screen O' Death with the error

NO BOOT DISK FOUND OR IS ACCESSABLE

Anyone seen this?

My System is

Abit BE6 MOBO with 2 built in ATA/66 slots.
PIII450
Maxtor Quantum Fireball Plus KA 13.3 ATA/66 HD
Voodoo 3 3500
A3D SoundCard

Thank's

THe CyPHa

[Kewldezigns]

I love windows 2000. I run a p-II 266 with 192 megs of ram and a 10 gig hd and it works great. I also find that the memory management is far better then any microsoft product on the market

------------------
Thanks,
Tim Lawrence
Kewldezigns

[theEnd]

Guys, I don't know why you are getting any different results than i am, but i have a dual piii 500, 128mb ram, asus v6600 32mb, sb live platinum, and a ultra ata/66 hd (27 gig) and i had it dual boot 98/2k for a while just because my cd burning software didn't know how to work in any flavor of NT, then i bought a different prog for that and got rid of 98 all together. i've only had ONE problem with w2k after the year i've been using betas and the like and it was because someone tried to install an NT4 driver on it. creative was a little slow in getting their live drivers out, but now they're here and working ok. i wouldn't go back to 98 if my life depended on it, and i've got NT4 installed on the machines at school that we use for video production. they get that job done, but try to do anything else on them and you're screwed. (i'd have put 2k on them except for the fact that they're old p90s with 24mb ram...)

all in all, 2k is the best os m$ has put out to date, and the driver problems you guys seem to be experiencing will fade in time. it's up to the hw manufacturers to put out working drivers for the stuff. m$ has even spent quite a bit of time putting reference drivers into w2k just so you can get your machine up even if the manufacturers are totally braindead.

as for games, tfc and cs are really all i play and they work fine on 2k.

/David

p.s. one more thing you might want to look into is a good BIOS update. check the website for your motherboard and see if they say anything about w2k issues. i have some on-board scsi controllers that w2k couldn't see because of an old bios... quick upgrade and all better

and i've never EVER had a problem with memory management.

[This message has been edited by theEnd (edited April 01, 2000).]

[HumanClay]

Fuckin' right!

I got Win2k up and running, and I must say that I am in love

Thanks to all of you guys for your help!

HumanClay

[Cypher]

Win2k sucks ass, dude!
If you need it for home, stick to Win98

If you need it on a network, get Linux! it's free...

[HumanClay]

Well, I love it.

I've ran Linux/FreeBSD/S.U.S.E.. etc.. for like years, I want something that is stable and practical for graphic design - and Win2k is exactly that.

Regardless of what other people's opinions are, I lubb it