Which OS should I get?

[Admiral Paddon]

Hey. I'm planning on building my own computer soon, and was wondering which OS should I get?

I'd like it to be able to handle the memory for using a word processing program, a graphics-intensive game, and one or two p2p programs for getting movies and such. I also plan on leaving it on 24/7 for it to download stuff using the p2p programs.

It should also be flexible, and be able to move from one network to another (I'm going to be going to college soon, and might need to move it around after that).

So what OS do you guys think I should get? Thanks!

[Baddog]

Dual boot: XP and Win 2000

Baddog

[Bigjakkstaffa]

2k pro for me - as stable as Xp - and without all the frills, whatsmore it runs okay on my sis's 450 Cleron withy 64mb ram ... which is always nice.

i would possibly choose XP pro - however i cant get it to install on my system :(

--Jakk:t

[Admiral Paddon]

All I'm asking is what OS manages the RAM/CPU power/HD space the best???

[Bigjakkstaffa]

Well 2k and Xp are more or less the same - basically id say for you - either a 2k pro or xp pro based platform.

--Jakk:t

[DocEvi1]

Win 2K is stable, but I have problems playing some of my older games on it....It handles memory better tho. What ever version you get, make sure it is the Pro - the home/standard editions suck.

Stefan

[Bigjakkstaffa]

Hmmn, never really had any problems with old games like stefan describes, on windows 2000 Pro. However you probably will want XP for the novelty and up to date factor.

Basically as long as you go pro you will be fine either way.

--Jakk:t

[Kurylo]

Two letters:
X and P.

[grimfandango]

7 letters!!

WIN 98se!!
:t

[Bigjakkstaffa]

technically thats 5 letters and 2 numbers

Why 98!?!

Ity manages large amounts of RAM badly - and with modern apps and games needing more ram..well - you get the picture.

--Jakk:t

[racronus]

I would go with XP pro, same stability and I've had better compatibility with it than win2000.

[onewave4me]

xp pro mo better then win2kpro

[grimfandango]

Originally posted by Bigjakkstaffa
technically thats 5 letters and 2 numbers

Why 98!?!

Ity manages large amounts of RAM badly - and with modern apps and games needing more ram..well - you get the picture.

--Jakk:t

well for one OLd is GOLD!!!

And win98se is still good enough!!

[Bizkitkid2001]

Originally posted by DocEvi1
Win 2K is stable, but I have problems playing some of my older games on it....It handles memory better tho. What ever version you get, make sure it is the Pro - the home/standard editions suck.

Stefan


XP home does not suck. It is basically the same thing as XP pro but without the extra network stuff that most people don't use. Don't just go off and say XP home sucks if you havn't tried it. Because if you have tried both XP home and pro you can't tell the ddifference between them. So basically if you say that XP home sucks, then you are saying that XP pro sucks. If you can tell me some good reasons why XP home sucks, then I will believe you. But for now it doesn't suck because its the same OS but with some features missing.

[Bigjakkstaffa]

Grim, granted 98 is still good enough - but as soon as games start requiring 512mb RAM, which i dont think will be far away, it will begin to struggle and be a hinderance to those using the platform for gaming. Addmittedly win 98 is faster than the newer OS's in SOME games, and is 100% compatible with all but the most archaic of MSDOS proggies, but its a very unstable shell, not only in terms of program errors but blue screening, which can be a hinderance if like me you are a 12hours a day computer on - user.

Overall 98SE may last you another year, but in terms of stability and future proofing for i'd say the next 5 years, XP and 2k are the way to go.

--Jakk:t

[grimfandango]

Originally posted by Bigjakkstaffa
Grim, granted 98 is still good enough - but as soon as games start requiring 512mb RAM, which i dont think will be far away, it will begin to struggle and be a hinderance to those using the platform for gaming. Addmittedly win 98 is faster than the newer OS's in SOME games, and is 100% compatible with all but the most archaic of MSDOS proggies, but its a very unstable shell, not only in terms of program errors but blue screening, which can be a hinderance if like me you are a 12hours a day computer on - user.

Overall 98SE may last you another year, but in terms of stability and future proofing for i'd say the next 5 years, XP and 2k are the way to go.

--Jakk:t

most of the games dont work on XP!!

and Xp will need a very power ful comp/cpu.
all I have is a 450 mhz!!
:(

[Bigjakkstaffa]

2k pro runs okay on my sisters machine for general purposes wih all the fancy effects on, and it runs Counter Strike well enough -- although i may do a little fiddling with TWEAK UI to speed it up a bit:

***Sisters Machine Spec***

Jetway J7bxan Mobo
intel Celeron 300A @ 450mhz
64mb RAM
4.3gb Seagate HDD
Voodoo 3 PCI 2000 16mb

--Jakk:t

[Optimus Prime]

Bigjakk, as a person who once have Win98SE on his machine i can say this:

Win98SE supports more than 512 mb of ram, its something like 640 mb of ram, so no worries! :)

:t

[Bigjakkstaffa]

It does support more than 512mb granted, but it doesnt make the most sensible use of it, and it also requires a fair bit of fiddlign about with system files to actually get ti to work effectivley.

I think all thi smessing about is something that Admiral Paddon, and even myself could do without, and what with the far superior shell stability and enhanced features of 2k and XP, win 98 looks decidedly long in the tooth.

C'mon man - its still based on what is essential technology from the 70's :eek:

--Jakk:t

[ngc457]

Most games don't work on XP is the biggest BS I have ever heard. Most games work great on XP plus you have something called stabilty and far better ram management that you don't have with the worthless disgrace piece of garbage 98. Windows 98 has no place on any computer. I would rather use one of them 1000 year old Chinese calculators then a computer with 98.

Windows XP now that is true heaven.

[Paco103]

I haven't had any problems with any games running on XP, and I haven't had to run any stability modes either. I have had some problems with apps though. I had to get new virus scan, new burning ROM (old Nero still works - I sure ain't buying new EasyCD for the same price as a new burner *WITH* easyCD). I took freebie alternatives though if I didn't already have something, and they're out there! Personally I like ME on an older system, or for compatibility. It's much more stable and efficient than 98, and I got it for $25!!!!

[GabeQ]

I've had nothing but problems with Windows ME. I've installed it on 4 systems and, on 3 of these, I had nothing but slow performance, freezes, and blue screens. As soon as I installed Win98 on these systems, my problems were gone. Windows ME was a rushed product, hence its unreliability.

[Bizkitkid2001]

Originally posted by grimfandango


most of the games dont work on XP!!

and Xp will need a very power ful comp/cpu.
all I have is a 450 mhz!!
:(


I had XP installed on my 300MHz machines, and talk about slooooooooooow. I had 768 MB of ram in that thing and it took forever to load the add/remove under the controll panel.

[otheos]

Anything not based on the NT kernel should be avoided like the plague and really not even called an OS.

Even MS says is unstable and memory managment (of any size) is really a joke. If it works for you then fine, but it's 4 years old (which other part in your PC is that old?) and support is about to be dropped by MS soon.

XP is stable but it's loaded with craploads of silly features that take up loads of resources. Never mind the activation (yes, smart people use corporate, but I'm not smart) that no person that walks upright should allow him/herself to give in and accept.

So W2K is really the best MS option at the moment.

[Jimstep]

I voted Other...you didn't have XP Pro Corp listed.

[grimfandango]

Originally posted by Bizkitkid2001



I had XP installed on my 300MHz machines, and talk about slooooooooooow. I had 768 MB of ram in that thing and it took forever to load the add/remove under the controll panel.

:eek:

Thanks
I am never goin to get Xp.

that is Until I get a new system!!
:p

[grimfandango]

Originally posted by Bigjakkstaffa
2k pro runs okay on my sisters machine for general purposes wih all the fancy effects on, and it runs Counter Strike well enough -- although i may do a little fiddling with TWEAK UI to speed it up a bit:

***Sisters Machine Spec***

Jetway J7bxan Mobo
intel Celeron 300A @ 450mhz
64mb RAM
4.3gb Seagate HDD
Voodoo 3 PCI 2000 16mb

--Jakk:t


Why cant you give your sister your com and take hers!!!
:p

lets see how you like slow SYStems!!
:p

[absalom]

Microsoft Windows XP - Professional


CNET Rating: 8 out of 10

The good: Streamlined interface; better performance on many systems; easier and more capable networking; integrated CD-R/RW playback and burn features; Pro version's Remote Assistance tool aids troubleshooting and control of remote PCs.
The bad: You can install XP on only one machine; piddling discounts for additional PC licenses; nags you to sign up for Passport Web account; Home Edition's multiple-user login screens are often redundant; heavy system requirements.
The bottom line: Despite its many annoyances, XP is a worthwhile upgrade. The Professional version boasts serious corporate administration tools, so if you're an enterprise customer, look to XP Pro.



69% of users give it a thumbs up and the other 31% gives it a thumbs down :eek: :eek: :eek:

http://home.cnet.com/software/0-806340-1204-6534868.html?tag=pdtl-list


Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional


CNET Rating: 8 out of 10

The good: Stable; easy to install; runs better on laptops than Windows NT does; powerful, sophisticated server; excellent help files; its improved interface is easier to use than NT's.
The bad: Mediocre peripheral support; slow boot times; expensive server.
The bottom line: Windows 2000 isn't for the gamer or the casual surfer, but if you have a yen for speed, stability, and some serious server tools, this business-class OS will do you right.


89% of users give it a thumbs up and the other 11% gives it a thumbs down :D :D :D
http://home.cnet.com/software/0-806340-1204-1503458.html?tag=pdtl-list

[Strawbs]

If the "which OS" question had been asked 6 months ago the outcome would have been 2k pro without any shadow of a doubt, and I seem to remember many sysopt ppl said on occasion that they would never sign up to XP. the results of this poll tell a different story, 2-1 in favour of XP Pro has to say something about the OS.

I bought this rig in august last year, I installed XP corp. in January and haven't had a crash worthy of note since. I work , play, surf and download for up to 16 hours a sitting sometimes, all without a hitch, and unlike some other M$ OSes it's stable straight out of the box. with '98 or Me I would be considering formatting for the second time this year already just to clear the bugs out, XP feels like it's almost unbreakable, and for someone that likes to tinker and optimise the OS, that says a lot.
as a combination of plaything and workhorse it cannot currently be beaten IMHO.

as for the "but it won't run my old games" brigade, just as new OS'es supercede old versions, so too do new games replace the previous realeases, and the new games will make you forget your atari games anyway. (hands up all those that still play pong) :p

XP Pro Corporate Edition. :r

[bassman]

Win2000 Pro...it'll do everything you said you need in fast, eficient and secure fashion ;)

[jad1097]

I am with otheos on this. I will not tolerate the activation ****.

“All I'm asking is what OS manages the RAM/CPU power/HD space the best???”



RAM/CPU power/HD space: Windows 2000 pro. Take a look at the minimum requirements for XP and W2K and you will see.




Linux is really the way to go IMHO. Right now my wife is using it on another box as I type this. If my wife can use it anyone can!! I have yet to try any gaming using WineX. But if you don't mind learning then I would recommend you give it a try.



BTW you should probably remove or have a mod remove “Windows 2000” from the poll since there is no home version. Just pro, server and advanced server.

[Paco103]

Dude - strawbs - I know you did not just diss Pong and Atari! I wish I could get Pitfall and Barnstormer on this thing! Atari had some cool games. I guess that's partially because they didn't have awesome graphics to deal with, so they ACTUALLY had to have a good game:P It's sad, I'm too young to remember the main Atari generation, but I do remember when regular 8-bit Nintendo had 'awesome graphics':P

[jad1097]

hmmmm Win-XP Search Assistant silently downloads files (http://theregister.co.uk/content/archive/24815.html)

[Ichelo351]

“All I'm asking is what OS manages the RAM/CPU power/HD space the best???”

easy, linux!!

[otheos]

True, however this thread is about MS operating systems, so let's stick to them (as linux vs. MS threads are not very constructive anyway).

WinNT4 must be the one here, but it's limited for the desktop user. So W2K should then be the one. WinXP is too bloated (especially the recovery bit that wastes so much space and causes almost double I/O requests to the hard disk).

You have to realise that MS builds new OSs with the intent for everyone to upgrade their hardware too. Otherwise it's just insane to think of "upgrading" your OS and end up with a slower box (cause WinXP on the same hardware is slower than W2K). And this is yet one more oxymoron: people keep tweaking WinXP to make it faster, when the easiest thing is to "downgrade" to W2k, or not update at all.

What is really that WinXP can do that W2K can't, or that WinXP can do so much better that it makes its sluggishness, wizzard filled and fisherprice environment worthwile?

It must be something really great, especially for the "price" of agreeing to that EULA and "activating", otherwise I don't see why so many people swallow everything MS gives them and use it.

[Paco103]

Activating? Who's activating? Didn't we just have a long post about corporate version to ditch that ****. Well as far as the "Fisher Price" interface - I agree. I *HATE* working on it when working on other people's computers. They've made it SOOO simple - it's impossible - they've hidden everything so that newbies aren't confused. Well, when I was new, I learned by just jumping in and playing a game of "What does this button do?. . . OOPS! - Put it back!" :P Honestly, the new 'userfriendly' interface sucks, it even hides 'my computer' - what's up with that? But you can revert everything to a classic system. It only took me about 2 days to revert XP to classic start menu/desktop/explorer folders. It only takes 5 minutes, but I was playing with it and deciding. Other than that it seems fine - but I really can't see that it's any better than ME or 2K, except MAYBE startup time (I know - most of you hate ME - but I like it - works fine on my system)

[tking]

Originally posted by Paco103
I haven't had any problems with any games running on XP, and I haven't had to run any stability modes either.

Diddo. I have half a dozen games installed on XP boxes with no problems. You might not be able to run too many titles from the nineties, but if you're building a new machine why would you be playing old games?

If you've got an older system, win98se is the best of the dos based 9x windose, but as Jakk said, "it's based on 70's technology!"

Wouldn't you rather be running a New Technology NT based system?

T

[Bigjakkstaffa]

“All I'm asking is what OS manages the RAM/CPU power/HD space the best???”


--im sure that was the original question, therefore games compatibility shouldnt really be coming into this debate.

As weve alreadys established this is based more towards lookign at MS OS's, therefore you MUST say the New NT systems (2k, XP) fit the bill perfectly.

Anyone saying that win 9x manages RAM efficiently is having a laugh in todqays world of coputing hwere people are moving towards Gb rather than Mb of RAM

--Jakk:t

[AllGamer]

Originally posted by Admiral Paddon
Hey. I'm planning on building my own computer soon, and was wondering which OS should I get?

I'd like it to be able to handle the memory for using a word processing program, a graphics-intensive game, and one or two p2p programs for getting movies and such. I also plan on leaving it on 24/7 for it to download stuff using the p2p programs.

It should also be flexible, and be able to move from one network to another (I'm going to be going to college soon, and might need to move it around after that).

So what OS do you guys think I should get? Thanks!

go get Linux Mandrake 8.2 or newer

http://www.mandrakelinux.com/en/ftptmp/1026755520.dabc630c8307adad4520cc67e494a9ff.php

They even have a Special Game Edition, which means you can play 99% of all DirectX and DOS games, in LINUX.

also if you like fancy stuff

Go get Red Had Linux 7.2 or newer

Red Had have the best user support.

personally i use Mandrake 8.2

[jad1097]

Paco103, I think you missed the point. How far are you willing to let them go before you start to worry? Will it be too late by then or is it too late now? Take a look at this (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,282114,00.asp?kc=ETAV102049TX1K0100486) and read it in it's entirety. I don’t know if people just don’t care or are ignorant about what’s going on but people need to wake up.


Do a search for Palladium and TCPA. Better yet I will make a post in general tech with a few links in a few.

[otheos]

Good point Jad1097, but just to be sure, I hope you all know that extremetech is one of those "convinced" sites, "hardware friendly" and "manufacturer coopperative" places known to use their space for more than journalism: guided articles. :)

[tking]

Originally posted by jad1097
Paco103, I think you missed the point. How far are you willing to let them go before you start to worry?

Thanks Jad, another article that jolts. I'm still reeling from that Walmart one you linked to before.

Otheos: good, healthy skepticism. You've got to ask yourself though, what isn't a convinced site? Everyone is trying to sell you something, that is the price of our free, consumer based society.

... and Jad? People won't do a **** thing if they think everything is ok. Unless someone really screws up, things will seem free and that's all most people want.

... which is why you should buy MS, or Intel, or AMD, or RedHat or ATI or Nvidia or whatever else - because there's no fundamental difference between any of them and how they do business. It's a hunter prey world and you the consumer are lunch! Do you really care who eats you?:)

So get XP, it's pretty!

T

[Dave Myers]

I would go for something based on the NT Kernal, Win2K or XP. I used to have win98. My wife crashed the computer 3 to 4 times a day. Since installing win2K, zero crashes. I use XP pro at work and have had zero problems since our upgrade 6 months ago.

Stability good

Crashing bad

I just wish I could still play Need for Speed Porche unleashed at home. (not Win2k compatible)

going back to sleep on the job now

)-|

D

[Paco103]

Well - I understand your thing about the activation and them trying to take control, that's why I don't activate - it's really none of their concern how often I format my hard drive, or how often I do upgrades. But as far as this whole OS debate - if you want to manage CPU/RAM efficiently - I just got a boxed retail version of DOS 3.3 on 5.25 AND 3.5 disks...original IBM logo, hard cover binder with the entire DOS manual. It doesn't waste ANY CPU/ram beyond what it needs, and virtually no wasted hard disk space - let's just all use that and get over the debate. Bottom line is any of them will get the job done

[Bigjakkstaffa]

Agreed they will all get the job done, however soem will get the job done more reliably than others, thats why we've benn asked to air our opinions about all the CURRENT operating systems by Admiral Paddon, so that he can in turn find the most reliable OS for his CURRENT needs....

Were not all still partying like its 1985 you know...

--Jakk:t

[Paco103]

yeah - sometimes I forget that my sarcasm doesn't air on the net:D I'm more used to talking in person or to people that know exactly how I'm meaning stupid comments like that:P Obviously more recent operating systems are going to be more efficient, even if they do use more ram and HDD:P

[Bigjakkstaffa]

I realise you were beign sarcastic - but please - people are offering valid statments and you turn around and give us something like that.....

i dont mind sarcasm -- but i prefer it if its actually funny...



apologies -- long day -- lack of sleep -- slimbing up the stairs ***** first because you cant get up properly with a broken ankle

IT ALL WEARS YOU DOWN MAN!!

LOL :p

Peace PACO

--Jakk:t

[jad1097]

XP: Kernel Improvements (http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/12/XPKernel/XPKernel.asp).
Not enough to convince me to use it. I think XP is so pretty and awesome I gave my copy away. Anyhow no use arguing about which is better. I recently got WineX and I will be leaving the MS OS's behind soon enough. Just need a linux compatible modem to get me on the net and I'm good to go.


lol I got an apple II and some tandys that run fine. It's all you need to get the job done. ;)
Palladium / TCPA (http://www.sysopt.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=111289) links like I said I would do.




Oh yes, the Wal-Mart link (http://www.rense.com/general24/rema.htm).



"There are no secrets...Only information you don't yet have"

[Strawbs]

OK! hows this? build a computer capable of running XP at a breeze, capable of playing Graphics intensive games, running movies, make sure to fit a good NIC, use a 400w. PS for stability and at least 256MB (preferabley 512MB or more ?$$$?) ram, make sure to have sufficient cooling, a flat screen panel will be easier to lug around than a CRT display.

Then install Win2k pro, in the meantime you can be hunting down a copy of XP Corporate for future proofing (you may find a copy in the Deans room :D ), networking, stability.
Eye Candy is an option you don't get with 2K tho.

multi gig HDD's mean that most don't worry too much about program sizes for now, processor management in XP is great, as it has a built in cooling program, and usage is kept to a minimum, which can only help long term processor life, memory management depends on how much you have, the more the merrier with XP.

[Kits47]

From my experience with XP it is not worth the powder to blow it to hell.. . which isn't a bad idea if someone would do it @ MS headquarters. XP, like ME is a trick out, dumbed down version of 2K and no one should pay for it. :D

[smelanson]

XP pro all the way!

[Strat]

W2K Pro.......... definately.

Just before BillyBoy got all obsessed with seeing what we do on our computer (ie giving himself admin priveliges on your computer (XP) and having the C.U.N.T (Current Update Notification Tool) hehe). But soon enough ago to still get the same stability as XP.



Who cares if you can't play bubble and bobble anymore on your computer, MOHAA, RTCW, GTA III, WC3 and CIV3 all run fine on my computer (Win2k Pro).

[Admiral Paddon]

Dang you guys like to get off-topic!! :eek: :rolleyes:

What exactly are the differences between Win2kPro and WinXP Pro?

READ: What differences will impact the abilities that I listed oh-so-long ago in this thread?

[Admiral Paddon]

Bump

[Admiral Paddon]

To the 16% who voted OTHER:

What OSes are you guys talking about :confused:
Linux? Unix?

[Bigjakkstaffa]

2k and XP pro are more or less the same except 2k is more streamliend and doesnt have the fancy graphical effects of XP. Whic makes it worse for showing off to your mates - but better if your after raw speed and power -- muahahaha...

--Jakk:t

[AllGamer]

Originally posted by Admiral Paddon
To the 16% who voted OTHER:

What OSes are you guys talking about :confused:
Linux? Unix?

yes Linux

or Solaris

Solaris 8 is free
Linux is all time free

And for BUSINESS need, as you said with 100% stability, no headache (except during the first install), and no need to reboot like every 3 hours with a WinXP/2k/NT4/ME/98/95/3.11/286/DOS system

hmmm... ok I TaKe the DOS part back.

DOS was rock solid. even at DOS v1.0

:)

anyways if you are planning to run games along with business need, then LINUX

my flavor is Mandrake Linux, latest version is 8.2

if you want games in Linux, just install WineX, the normal Wine will run Windoze stuff, WineX will run DirectX games.

Linux has build in support for 3Dfx GL, and OpenGL 3d support.

The only downside with games in Linux is the Audio, it really depends which Sound Card you have.

:rolleyes:

Else if it is PURELY Business, then SOLARIS, all software companies offer support for their own products under Solaris Unix.

Latest release is version 8.0

:t

[AllGamer]

Originally posted by Admiral Paddon
Hey. I'm planning on building my own computer soon, and was wondering which OS should I get?

I'd like it to be able to handle the memory for using a word processing program, a graphics-intensive game, and one or two p2p programs for getting movies and such. I also plan on leaving it on 24/7 for it to download stuff using the p2p programs.

It should also be flexible, and be able to move from one network to another (I'm going to be going to college soon, and might need to move it around after that).

So what OS do you guys think I should get? Thanks!



ALL YOU GUYS HAS BEEN GOING WAAAAAAAAAY OFF TRACK

HERE READ WHAT HE SAID WHEN THIS WHOLE THING STARTED.

a Good OS for 24/7 - 365/century no maintainance, and no headache, that can sastify all his file sharing needs, Office needs, and maybe some Games.

ok the year per century is a bit exagerated, but yeah with LINUX you can probably go for 100+ year without any maintainance, provided during those 100+ years there hasn't been any Natural or Human disaster that could have affected the system performance, and power.

:D

[Paco103]

Actually I think I read somewhere that the computer uptime record was for a Linux/Unix system at a time of over 11 years - it was finally shut down for hardware upgrade. With windows I'm generally excited by over a week of uptime! I could never even keep a system for 1 year without some upgrade that required a shutdown!!

[Admiral Paddon]

I don't know what you guys are talking about, I've been able to get my Win98 computer to be up for over 2 monthes without shutting it down. I don't even have any special programs for redistributing the memory, or anything!!

But ELEVEN YEARS?!?! :eek: :eek:

Anyway, I'm really interested in only MS OSes. Don't know why, but I am.

So Win2kPro = (WinXPPro - graphical frills) ? Cool.

[$1500-P4 gamer]

Alot of my games wont even run on XP. Even newer ones like Giants that are supposed to work. The sound makes a really horrid hiss-hiss through out the game. And yes the soundcard drivers are updated-still no go. There is also alot of hardware thats not supported in XP like my printer. Oh and its pro version. I have tried properties>run in win98 compat. mode. Still no go. If you game or have anyhardware not specifically made for XP dont get it without having somthing else to dual boot with. I still end up in 98 for most stuff as it atleast works as it should. My printer is like 3months old and it doesnt work-errr! So get ANYTHING but XP if you want compatability! also my tv tuner card-no go in XP with bundled recorder player. HAve to use a beta free vcr prog. I found and it works good. But the XP drivers by ATI are a joke to say the least. Everytime you click tv it goes to green lines through the screen-then you have to change the res. to and back to get the image to come through. Hit record-same thing. Annoying isnt event the word for it. Now I and MANY others have this issue. ATI claims they dont have a prob. So its the finger pointing game all over again. I love it when co.'s do that-its there fault or I dont know whats wrong but its not us. Oh sure its not. So even some stuff XP certified doesnt work at times its all a gamble this early in the release. Buy it in two years when they actually fix the dumb thing-if even then!! The ati tv tuner works great in 98 or Me but not in XP at all!:rolleyes: :t

[Admiral Paddon]

Originally posted by $1500-P4 gamer
Alot of my games wont even run on XP. Even newer ones like Giants that are supposed to work. The sound makes a really horrid hiss-hiss through out the game. And yes the soundcard drivers are updated-still no go. There is also alot of hardware thats not supported in XP like my printer. Oh and its pro version. I have tried properties>run in win98 compat. mode. Still no go. If you game or have anyhardware not specifically made for XP dont get it without having somthing else to dual boot with. I still end up in 98 for most stuff as it atleast works as it should. My printer is like 3months old and it doesnt work-errr! So get ANYTHING but XP if you want compatability! also my tv tuner card-no go in XP with bundled recorder player. HAve to use a beta free vcr prog. I found and it works good. But the XP drivers by ATI are a joke to say the least. Everytime you click tv it goes to green lines through the screen-then you have to change the res. to and back to get the image to come through. Hit record-same thing. Annoying isnt event the word for it. Now I and MANY others have this issue. ATI claims they dont have a prob. So its the finger pointing game all over again. I love it when co.'s do that-its there fault or I dont know whats wrong but its not us. Oh sure its not. So even some stuff XP certified doesnt work at times its all a gamble this early in the release. Buy it in two years when they actually fix the dumb thing-if even then!! The ati tv tuner works great in 98 or Me but not in XP at all!:rolleyes: :t

Ok. That clinches it. Win2kPro for me! :) Thanks for all of your help, guys! :t

[Paco103]

I have an ATI All-in-Wonder 7500, which has the ATI tuner on board, and I have had no problems with it under XP - however it does have a lot of other compatibility issues. Older software (and even some new) has trouble running under it - even in compatibility mode. Perhaps the tuner problem is just for your specific tuner, or a combination with some other factors - but I have no doubt that there are a lot of compatibility problems if you want your OS to be versatile.

[Asonic]

I often network my 98se system to a XP home system for lan gaming, the only real difference is the spec of these pc's is the 98se is (now) using a Athlon running at 1Ghz and the XP pc is a P4 1.9 ghz.

looking at the specs you would think the P4 is quicker but it is not really, if fact 98se loads the game (UT 436) quicker due to my 7200rpm HD but the game plays the same on both machines.

I know this is not helping very much but my point is that for todays software there is little to choose between the two except for relibility, my thoughts on that is....Microsoft will put more effort into XP because it is their new bady, so if there is reliblilty questions about XP thay are more likely to be sorted out. How long will MS continue to update 98????

(but they have been working 98 for a long time and to be fair it almost works now)

[AllGamer]

Originally posted by Paco103
I have an ATI All-in-Wonder 7500, which has the ATI tuner on board, and I have had no problems with it under XP - however it does have a lot of other compatibility issues. Older software (and even some new) has trouble running under it - even in compatibility mode. Perhaps the tuner problem is just for your specific tuner, or a combination with some other factors - but I have no doubt that there are a lot of compatibility problems if you want your OS to be versatile.

Have tried Dissabling ACPI ??

how about the latest video capture drivers, and Catalyst drivers from ATI?

my problems went away after killing ACPI.

[Paco103]

I think I missed something? I'm not having problems with my card?! Did you mean to quote the guy above me?

[AllGamer]

Originally posted by Paco103
I think I missed something? I'm not having problems with my card?! Did you mean to quote the guy above me?

oh! :eek: oooops!, my bad :r

[grimfandango]

I will still say the win98/98se is best for old systems/slow .

Installing winXp on this will make it real slow.

:t

[AllGamer]

Originally posted by grimfandango
I will still say the win98/98se is best for old systems/slow .

Installing winXp on this will make it real slow.

:t

Yup.

I like to use win9x better than anything else for my Games.

i play most of my games in 9x

the only time i use 2k, is for internet, and work, or DVD, and TV, or video editing, and music recording mixing, etc.

[xxmindcrimexx]

grimfandango....I have a mp3 server running ME, W2K, and XP PRO and I have no problem running XP. It a K6-2 300MHz w\ 192MB ram and even running XP in it's "pretty" mode it's as quick as the other 2 OS's. When I switch it to classic mode it's the quickest off all the 3. You may want to give it a try.:)

[Paco103]

hmm - care to share your MP3 server with us?! ;)

[xxmindcrimexx]

well......maybe. you were interested in the Barry Manilow and Backstreet Boys songs right? It took some digging (thanks mom and sis) but i found them paco. (just kidding)!!:p