SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 24 of 24
  1. #1
    SitePoint Zealot ANETEK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA 93309
    Posts
    104
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I am looking to purchase a Sony Vaio FX150. It offers a choice
    of either Windows Millennium Edition, or, 2000-Professional.

    I will be networking it - via a router - to my Compaq, which has Windows-98. Most of my work is in the Microsoft Office group of programs, FrontPage2000, PhotoDeluxe and on the internet.

    Any thoughts concerning my Operating System selection?

    Thanks in advance,

    Elton
    Elton Kelly / ANETEK
    ANETEK.com ... ANETSTORE.com ... 10MAX.com
    eCommerce Website-design - downloading within 10-seconds @ 28.8-Kbps

  2. #2
    SitePoint Wizard westmich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Muskegon, MI
    Posts
    2,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    IMHO, I have chosen to go with Windows 2000. It offers more stability, networking support, and comes with IIS 5 for development/Web hosting purposes.

    I have heard others say they prefer WinME for games.
    Westmich
    Smart Web Solutions for Smart Clients
    http://www.mindscapecreative.com

  3. #3
    Sports Publisher mjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    5,891
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Good question, ANETEK. I have the same issue, not sure which to go with. I know most will say go with 2k since it provides reliability, enhanced networking capabilities, etc., but my question is:

    What limitations does 2k give me that I wouldn't have on ME? I want to know if I will be able to download the same software, the same games, etc., all the multimedia features on 2k.

  4. #4
    SitePoint Wizard westmich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Muskegon, MI
    Posts
    2,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm not big into games. A few of the ones I've had worked fine under 98, but wouldn't work under W2K.
    Westmich
    Smart Web Solutions for Smart Clients
    http://www.mindscapecreative.com

  5. #5
    SitePoint Zealot ANETEK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA 93309
    Posts
    104
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm not into games, just photography,
    websites and the internet.

    Elton
    Elton Kelly / ANETEK
    ANETEK.com ... ANETSTORE.com ... 10MAX.com
    eCommerce Website-design - downloading within 10-seconds @ 28.8-Kbps

  6. #6
    SitePoint Guru sowen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Stockport, UK
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Win 2K then.

    I was running Photoshop, CorelDraw, and Office 2K on 98 on my business machine (1/2 Gb of Ram) and needed to reboot on average 2 times a day.

    With W2K I can get 5-6 day uptime.

  7. #7
    Sports Publisher mjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    5,891
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My question was never answered:

    What limitations does 2k give me that I wouldn't have on ME? I want to know if I will be able to download the same software, the same games, etc., all the multimedia features on 2k.
    Someone who could help is appreciated.

  8. #8
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    2,629
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm a part-time gamer and I use Win2k. I've had absolutely no problems with 99% of the games. But, it seems, every single Flight sim (haven't tried MS's) I've tried doesn't work. So if you're in to those, don't get 2k.

    OpenGL and DirectX8 both work flawlessly. Q3A, Half-Life, Tribes 2, etc. all work on Win2k, some with more frames per second than in Win98. Games aren't really a problem.

    All software that works on Windows 95, NT, ME, or 98 will work on 2000. I can't think of any that wouldn't.

    By now, every hardware manufacturer has a Win2k driver out for its products.

    If by multimedia you also mean digital video, then that's fine too. Win2k supports Firewire and it has drivers for your DV camera (99% of the time).

    Win2k just takes up more RAM and CPU than Win98. A tiny bit more. But it's more a power users OS than a consumer OS. So it's probably a good choice for most SitePointers.

  9. #9
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Posts
    1,390
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by M. James
    What limitations does 2k give me that I wouldn't have on ME? I want to know if I will be able to download the same software, the same games, etc., all the multimedia features on 2k.
    As Quinn just said, you have very few limitations with Windows 2000. 16-bit programs don't work with it, but the chances of you using 16-bit programs is very slim. Some 3D games and computer maintenence programs don't work either, but there isn't much.

    I have tried quite a few games in Windows 2000, many of them are 3D games. I haven't found any problems yet.

  10. #10
    Sports Publisher mjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    5,891
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Okay, great. I was just checking before I make my mind up on getting 2k on my next computer. I'm not a big gamer, but I don't want to have limitations should I wish to become one.

  11. #11
    SitePoint Wizard big_al's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    1,661
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use win2k and I love it!

    No real hassles and seeing that the computer is going to be a new one all peripherals should be compatible.

    It goes faster, is more stable than any of the 9x, me and previous NT platforms.

    If you run alot of apps they generaly will load faster and be more stable.
    Networking is a breeze until you get in to the more complex aspects of it and then there are plenty or resources about it.

    As for games, I find as long as you have the new version of DirectX installed most games will work.

    And yes the MS flight sims work on Win2k
    .NET Code Monkey

  12. #12
    SitePoint Addict zoordaan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    NYC/Texas
    Posts
    348
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I recommend win 2k, it's definately more stable. The only thing I don't like about it is the longer time it takes to initialize when you turn it on vs. win me or win 98.

  13. #13
    SitePoint Addict isuru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    206
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Umm.. this is slightly off topic but is there a sort of "DOS Emulator" for Win2k that allows you to run old DOS programs in Win 2K?

  14. #14
    Fluffy Kitten Programmer~ Elledan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,356
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by isuru
    Umm.. this is slightly off topic but is there a sort of "DOS Emulator" for Win2k that allows you to run old DOS programs in Win 2K?
    NT 5 (AKA Win2k) has, just like NT 4, cmd.exe, which simulates a DOS environment.

    As for choosing between WinME and Win2k, I wouldn't even want WinMe to get near any of my PC's.
    www.nyanko.ws - My web-, software- and game development company.
    www.mayaposch.com - My personal site and blog.

  15. #15
    SitePoint Zealot ANETEK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA 93309
    Posts
    104
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for all of the help.

    Sony made the decision for me (for me).

    Elton
    Elton Kelly / ANETEK
    ANETEK.com ... ANETSTORE.com ... 10MAX.com
    eCommerce Website-design - downloading within 10-seconds @ 28.8-Kbps

  16. #16
    exit();
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Posts
    759
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, I wouldn't have chosen WindowsME, nor would have listened to Sony.

    WindowsME is just like a more messed up Windows98..although Windows 2000 is very nice and stable. I am on it now and it's been up for around..4 days now

  17. #17
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Posts
    28
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Win2k is the most stable that Micro$oft ever had made. If you want Win2k to be more stable then install it as NTFS instead FAT32.

  18. #18
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    win2k is cra

    Hi
    I've used win2k for 8 months pretty much in depth and I find it crashes all the time and is full of bugs, but its far more stable than win98 and I imagine therefore Win ME.
    What has it come to when we praise an OS as being good just because its not as awful as the previous version, even though its still pretty dire?
    Lets hope WinXP do's what it says on the box.
    Take it easy


    Oh damn! Woke up to find myself alive.

  19. #19
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy
    beley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    LaGrange, Georgia
    Posts
    6,117
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you have to have a windows based machine - I would recommend win2k. I use it on my pc at home and at the office - It never crashes on me (win98 used to crash once or twice a day). You don't have to restart it all the time either, it manages memory much better than 98.

    Of course, nothings better than a Mac, but for for those of you who are still in the Matrix oblivious to reality, you'll come around sometime

    J.K. I use both - windows machines have a purpose... sometimes

  20. #20
    SitePoint Enthusiast norfett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Sheffield, UK
    Posts
    95
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I can think of something better than a mac...


    Look its a PC! - bleedin ell, I'd rather hav Linux on my PC than have a mac, seeing with PC's youve a lot more choice with ya bits

    Besides that, I'm not even tempted with the new Imac - it looks like someones been sick on it, and as for that G4 cube, well thats just plain weird - Id rather have a dull pc set-up that does the job than a mac that just sits there looking ugly.

    besides that, Macs cant even manage a full screen browser!
    Last edited by norfett; May 23, 2001 at 00:52.
    Current Projects:
    Brighton Rockz - The only Albion Fanzine

    Always Skint - THE forums for BHAFC fans

  21. #21
    I believe you have my stapler. scrubz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Uh-oh, this thread isn't going to turn in to a PC vs. Mac debate, is it?! ... (Macs are awesome, but so are PCs. 'Nuff said.)

    I use Win2K Pro at work and ME at home. Bottom line, Win2K rocks, and ME is garbage. Win2K is much more stable and handles resources better. Heck, it even releases system resources after quitting an application (what a concept!). Win ME is a resource hog, and after opening and closing multiple programs, my resources rapidly dwindle to critical levels.

    For your average home user, ME would probably be fine. When there's work to do, I'd go with Win2K Pro.

  22. #22
    Your daddy. WALoeIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    526
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    W2K!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I have been up for 3 weeks without a reboot!

    I have had 2 conflicts with games that I wanted to play on W2k, but they were made in early 95' so it doesn't suprise me. ME is horrible! Steer clear. If you want some proof. Go to microsofts website, and their bug section, then search for Win ME, you get 240 documents, which is the max (I also searched for "and" "the" "Microsoft" all which gave 240) And then you can search for a stable product like Win 98 SE, and you only get 180 documents. ME has been out for a few months, and win 98 SE has been out for 3 YEARS. There are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO many bugs its insane.

  23. #23
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    46
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I tested it for a few days before I got rid of it. Windows XP has astupid activation thing, why should some people be forced to call a toll number (Like people in Canada) to activate it and that is if you upgrade your hardware and have to reinstall it. They also fruitified the interface now, at least it's not imac fruity. But it does start up cool, it fades in to black and says Windows Whistler and it has color stripes and it takes like 10 seconds to boot.

    Back to Windows 2000 I use Windows 2000 Advanced Server right now and it works fine for me, but Windows 2000 does take a lot longer to boot though.

  24. #24
    Victory shall be mine tubedogg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Medina, OH
    Posts
    440
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: win2k is cra

    Originally posted by Stupid
    I've used win2k for 8 months pretty much in depth and I find it crashes all the time and is full of bugs, but its far more stable than win98 and I imagine therefore Win ME.
    What has it come to when we praise an OS as being good just because its not as awful as the previous version, even though its still pretty dire?
    I don't know if you're running a beta or what but I can leave my computer running (and have) for weeks at a time and have found no bugs whatsoever with it. It is 1000% better than Win98 and 10000% better than WinME.
    Kevin


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •