windows 2000 and multimedia

olrac

Distinguished
Feb 11, 2001
196
0
18,680
If Windows XP is an upgrade from Windows 2000 then why is Windows 2000 not recommended for game play? Everyone says Windows 98SE or XP for gaming but if XP uses the same kernel as W2k, whats the big deal? What am I sacrificing by installing windows 2000? I want to install W2k pro but everyone tells me not too because its not very good for games amd multimedia.
 

Toejam31

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,989
0
20,780
In my experience, Win2K does very well with games and multimedia, especially with Service Pack 2 and the latest compatibility updates installed. It won't run everything, and it depends on the age of the game that you install. But it definitely will run the majority of newer games on the market, and if you are concerned about DVD, installing a decent software package for this purpose will take care of that.

The situation is, though, that Win2K was meant for the corporate market, while WinXP is aimed more at the mainstream personal desktop user market. WinXP has more multimedia features, and better game compatibility, IMHO. But that doesn't mean you can't use Win2K for nearly everything that will run on WinXP. Personally, I still think that Win2K SP2, when set up correctly, is still the most stable of the OS's that MS has released, and that isn't something to sneeze at.

If you want the best of both worlds ... dual-boot with Win9x and Win2K/WinXP. For the best results, put Win98 on one hard drive, and Win or WinXP on a second drive. Or even set up a multiple boot with all three. Then run everything to your heart's content. You'll be able to compare between the operating systems, and see what is best for your purposes.

There's always a workaround when running Windows, you see.

Toejam31

<font color=red>First Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=17935" target="_new"><font color=green>Toejam31's Devastating Dalek Destroyer</font color=green></A>
<font color=red>Second Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=15942" target="_new"><font color=green>Toey's Dynamite DDR Duron</font color=green></A>
__________________________________________________________

<font color=purple>"Some push the envelope. Some just lick it. And some can't find the flap."</font color=purple>
 

olrac

Distinguished
Feb 11, 2001
196
0
18,680
Sounds good, I think I'm solely gonna go with W2K only because I know that all of my hardware and software is supported with this OS. I thought about going to XP but that may be premature at the moment considering that its so new and not everything has been tested with it. Maybe when a service pack comes out, I may consider it.
 

Toejam31

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,989
0
20,780
That's cool. But I thought I'd mention that the great majority of the patches and updates that are included in the first WinXP Service pack are already available for download at the <A HREF="http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/en/default.asp?corporate=true" target="_new">Corporate Windows Update</A> site. So there's no reason to shy away from the OS if that is what concerns you.

I've been installing WinXP for about eight months on various systems, with a minimum of problems. As long as the hardware is supported, and the BIOS is a fairly recent version, it's not any more difficult or problematic than installing or running Win2K. They are very similar in most respects, with WinXP being a little more demanding on the system in terms of memory than the older OS.

I've always been a big fan of Win2K, as you might have surmised, but I'm running WinXP all around on both of my personal systems without any problems. It's especially stable on the backup system, surprisingly enough, even more so than on my main rig.

With XP Pro available, I don't seen any reason to go back and run Win2K unless I come across a less demanding system where the user would rather not run Win98SE or WinME.

There are websites like this <A HREF="http://www.ntcompatible.com/" target="_new">one</A> that can give you more information that you might find helpful, or just interesting, if you like to read about this sort of thing.

Just a few additional comments for you to mull over, ya know, before you spend the money.

See ya around ...

Toejam31

<font color=red>First Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=17935" target="_new"><font color=green>Toejam31's Devastating Dalek Destroyer</font color=green></A>
<font color=red>Second Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=15942" target="_new"><font color=green>Toey's Dynamite DDR Duron</font color=green></A>
__________________________________________________________

<font color=purple>"Some push the envelope. Some just lick it. And some can't find the flap."</font color=purple>
 

Toejam31

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,989
0
20,780
<A HREF="http://mywebpages.comcast.net/winhelp2002/security.htm" target="_new">Is Your Software Spying on You?</A>

Toejam31

<font color=red>First Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=17935" target="_new"><font color=green>Toejam31's Devastating Dalek Destroyer</font color=green></A>
<font color=red>Second Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=15942" target="_new"><font color=green>Toey's Dynamite DDR Duron</font color=green></A>
__________________________________________________________

<font color=purple>"Some push the envelope. Some just lick it. And some can't find the flap."</font color=purple>
 

olrac

Distinguished
Feb 11, 2001
196
0
18,680
Can you give me some more reasons? I would like to know if I'm the only one who does not really like XP that much. I'm sure its stable and all but I did have it running for a brief time on my DFI AD72/Athlon XP1600+/512 DDR and personally I thought Windows 98SE blew it right out of the water speed wise! When I swithced back I was amazed at how much of a "get up and go" os W98SE really is. Sure Windows 98 SE has its faults but never the less it does perform quite well as far as performance goes.
http://www.ocaddiction.com/articles/os/98vsXP/
I still don't understand what the big hype is about. Sure its new and looks great but I still like the fact that I can do multiple tasks in 98SE and system doesnt even blink.