Upgrade to Win2K?

  • Thread starter old.FingerMagnet
  • Start date
O

old.FingerMagnet

Guest
I am wondering if I should install win2k on my machine. Basically I like the idea of a stable environment, but I'm worried about compatibility of certain software. TBH most of the time i only play Q2 and a little Q3/UT thrown in for good measure. How does Win2k handle these games?

Plus as I might be installing Win2k soon, are there any tips that I should know?
 
O

old.Monyet

Guest
install it, but keep win98 on there in case you don't like win2k :p

i've been using win2k since december, i play q2, CS, q3 (very rarely) and UT (even more rarely).

openGL works fine for me although d3d is a bit iffy...

dunno about performance, maybe 4fps lower in win2k for me can't exactly remember cos i deleted win98 so long ago :)

stable? indeed - i had the thing running for a week and it still felt like i only just booted up :)
 
O

old.FingerMagnet

Guest
Ta, I'll have to go look for all win2k compatible drivers now :)
 
O

old.FingerMagnet

Guest
Remember to save all ya passwords b4 u change your OS :(

But lucky I found my BW password eventually :)
 
O

old.[GA] Shovel

Guest
Win 2k *seems* to be getting a mixed reaction from people.

Some people are saying its fine and heartily recommending it. Others (primerally the gaming press it seems) are saying that it is not worth it. Now whether that is cause they dont want to risk getting feedback complaining when someone cant run a game :))

Intrestingly the technical bod at PCGW wrote in this months issue about 2k not really doing to business, especially with older games.
He mainly commented that Winblows Millenium is he thing to wait for for games - tho that must be crap as it is a 9x kernal and will simply suffer from the same problems as 95/98.
He did mention "Neptune" (Win 2001) - which aparently has a team looking specifical at these game compatibility issues.
So, next year..... :/
 
O

old.MeddlE

Guest
Personally I have been running win2k final since January, it hasn't crashed once, it plays all the games I want to play, it's net performance is much more stable and I haven't booted into win98 for a couple of months now. So, I still have 98 on my machine but I don't need it. Must get round to replacing it with leenucks.

Cheers all.
 
O

old.FingerMagnet

Guest
Win2000 seems okay. I've only used it for about a week and abit but everything seems cool. Q2 runns well and so does Q3, haven't tried any older games cos I don't play anything else at the moment.
The only thing Win2k has over win98 imo is stability. Win2k still feels fresh even after being active for 20h. If this is important for u then give win2k a try. If not then stick to win98 or wait for win millennium.
O yea internet connections seems enhanced over Win98 too. :)
 
O

old.TUG

Guest
Me gaming m8's who have used Millennium Beta 3 says its pretty mint0r - stable and quick...

I dunno meself... u never know :) I hear comments like it has the stability of win2k but is a bit quicker for games and has less networking bollox so its more of a good home user OS
 
O

old.Monyet

Guest
hehe - i forgot to mention that win2k was shit for game compatibility :D

but hey it plays Q2 and CS, so i'm sorted :p

and yeah it's stable as hell - apart from when your hardware fails...

if you play many games, into emulation, want working gravis pads and use AOL :) then don't install win2k as all you'll be able to do is enjoy the fading menus :D
 
O

old.FingerMagnet

Guest
Why the heck did MicroSoft give these OS such similar names? Doesn't it seem more logical that win98 would be replaced by Win2000. I know this is a small point but one that has me annoyed, and erm i thought i'd share that wiv ya at 2am.

Shit I'm trying everything to avoid doing some revision! ;)

------------------
FingerMagnet@Pakistans.com
 
O

old.Mikey

Guest
I'vr had W2k for about 2 weeks now and I've found it great. Yeah I did the bad thing trying it with 64MB RAM, and it was just plain shite, but I'm now on 192MB and it is pretty sweet. Although I can see why people are using it with 256MB RAM.

Running NFS 5 on it and it is great. Now that game suck memory! Accoring to the task manager my memory usuage goes to about 210MB. Jeez!!!

What is 3dfx V3000 support liek under W2k as I'm considering dumping my G400 for one.


Mikey out :D

------------------
Remember!

Don't Take Life Too Seriously! :D
 
X

Xavier

Guest
I've been using win2k in some form or other since RC2 and I have come to the conclusion that Windows 2000 is a very well-written, stable OS,

BUT

If, like most people you have got the odd bit of generic kit, or maybe you have cut a few corners and grabbed 'b' grade hardware then you are totally screwed for drivers, cards like the dxr3 dvd decoder(creative labs) are still waiting for the alpha release of their drivers, canon have released drivers for 10% of their printers and epsons support is nearly as poor... if you are using a winmodem/softmodem etc then you will find that there are no working drivers atm and no support from crummy manufacturers... meaning that the mighty windows2000 'professional' could flounder totally, not due to bugs (lots of those, allegedly) nor support from the software industry (future games are 99% win2k compatible) but due to idle hardware and peripheral manufacturers who are too busy releasing new products to bother to support the ones that they have already sold.
 
O

old.Necro

Guest
Win2000 is basically a rename of WinNT 6. Unless you've got a reason to upgrade (for instance, you've just bought a 2-processor system) its a safer bet to stay with Win95/98.

Win2000's main problem seems to be a lack of drivers.
 
O

old.MeddlE

Guest
Sorry Necro, but it's NT5, also drivers are no problem on the whole as there is very good community support. Try www.win2kworld.com for all the latest drivers.
It is so much more stable than win95/98 that I couldn't really recommend anyone to install 95/98 now, and game issues are getting better with every new release of drivers.
 
O

old.Necro

Guest
I decided to do a quick test and look for Win2000 SoundBlaster AWE32 drivers. None found. Thats a driver availability problem in my books.

A few people in my clan have converted to Win2000, with results varying from unspectacular to outright hell. My view is that if someone has a working Win95/98 setup then i don't think its worth them going to the expense of upgrading to Win2000. As for new machines..
 
O

old.MeddlE

Guest
Win2k has AWE32 drivers built in, I know this as my slave machine has one of these cards in it. I don't think you've really tried it to be honest, either that or you had already made your mind up before you tried it, which means that you wasted your time.

I'm not having a go, I just feel that you are negatively slagging what is probably the best MS operating system yet released. And don't get me wrong, I'm not pro MS, but I'm also not anti.
 
O

old.Necro

Guest
I'd regard my advice as very conservative rather than negative.

You would get a simular answer from me if you asked if its worth upgrading from Win95 to Win98.
 
K

kryt

Guest
Right - Some pointers
Windows 2000 is NOT a complete end user product for use by the average joe. There is Windows 98 for that. Windows 2000 is NOT a replacement for 98, which is a commonly misplaced thought. Windows 2000 WILL work on anything if you know how to make it do so - and if you dont know how to make it do so - then you Should be using windows 98 - you are not classed "proffesional" as the most basic form of Windows 2000 is marketed at. If you know your stuff, you will be able to get it installed and running AOK with great end results. Ok it took me 2 attempts at first i admit that - but everything has a learning curve, if at first you dont suceed - try again - Its worth it. Since using windows 2000 i REFUSE point blank to go back to a 16bit kernel such as 98/95. Windows 2000 is more or less Windows NT. At first glimpse it looks like what everybody is used to using. Once you use it, you see its very different. Its not a replacement for 98, so PLEASE dont slag it off because of your common misconceptions.

[Cw.F]Kryten
 
O

old.MeddlE

Guest
Kryten, the voice of reason.

Got mine on first attempt tho. ;)
 
O

old.frankie

Guest
what about if i bought a big 17 gb hdd, and had me old 8 gig left as it is with win98 on it, could i transfer me setup files from the win98 drive to the win2k one ?.

------------------
----------------------
-------------------------
----------------------
DR_FRANKENSTIEN
 
O

old.Monyet

Guest
well said kryts :)

don't bother with win2k if you're just into games - it's not going to give you much extra fps/speed.

i upgraded cos i was fed up of the shiteness of win98 compared to NT :)

win2k is a fantastic OS but as said earlier - if you wanna play games don't fkn bother :p
 
K

kryt

Guest
Well there you go. If your a gamer and nothing else, stick to the ol' 98. It will last you until Millennium pops onto the shop shelves sometime this year. Im personally just a gamer, but I like to teach myself stuff, and in learning windows 2000, i have the experience, and I find it perfectably suitable for my current needs, including all the games i run. I do admit tho, today i just formatted everything, reinstalled with a dual boot of Win2k and Debian :) I know no linux, again just wanna learn it, by diving in the deep end :)

Kryten
 
H

HangTime

Guest
ive been using win2k for the last cppl months, as an OS it is very nice overall due to stability and general configurability. The networking is very nice indeed compared to 98se/WinMe, as far as configuring dialups and the like goes. ive tried WinMe beta3 and it still has the same dialup settings as 98se, ie u can only redial up to 100 times (lame?), no auto-redial on disconnect, poor handling of multilink isdn connections (u cant leave the second line auto dialing, unless u wait down the 'r' key :) )

HOWEVER, its getting to the point where im gonna have to stick WinMe back on, due to poor performance in games under win2k. in qw/q3 etc i get ~10-15% worse fps, a considerable margin. While i can understand the in an opengl environment (q3), due to driver immaturity etc, the fact that the software qw renderer is noticably slower is a rather bad sign in my book. add to this the fact that some games just dont run at all under win2k and the frustration mounts. add win2k networking to ME, or 98/me performance/compatibility to win2k, and id b sorted. as it stands im gonna have to go back to a dual boot config, with winme for playing fps hungry games, and win2k for general internet stuff.
 
K

kryt

Guest
Hangtime, i should just point out the reason for your QW running slowly in software rendering .. it is built for optimum performance on a 16bit system, whereas windows 2000 runs on 32/64 bit technology, and is not at all 16bit based like the 9x series (95, 98, WinMe) But again, do give MS the chance, 2000 is one thing they have got right, all we can wait for now is the continued research and support of the OEM's driver writers doing their funky stuff. MS have done their part, and have done it well (for once). I raise my hands and clap them for that. I will however raise my right fist and threaten mr Gates for his fortune if such an opportunity ever arose.

[Cw.F]Kryten signing off his mindless gibberish gabbering on about nothing inparticluar.

Nite.

Yes, honestly, im off now..


soon maybe

okok get the point, n'nite


fffffffs kryten FUCK OFF TO SLEEP or something

zzzzzzzzzz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top Bottom