NT 4.O OR 2000
Just a question guys, not trying to start a 3 mile long thread. But I have been using NT 4. O for a while now and I love the thing, I need it for my Cad programs among other things. The only down fall is there just isen't a lot of games out there that will play on it.
Just a question guys, not trying to start a 3 mile long thread. But I have been using NT 4.O for a while now and I love the thing, I need it for my Cad programs among other things. The only down fall is there just isen't a lot of games out there that will play on it. Im sure that will change in the future. But im puzzeled about Win 2000. I read this forum all the time and all I hear is people haveing problems with 2000. Compatability problems, among other things.
Is it just me or are there others out there seeing the same thing. Just an observation folks not trying to stir the pot, I know how sensative people in this forum can be when NT is critisized in any way.
Is it just me or are there others out there seeing the same thing. Just an observation folks not trying to stir the pot, I know how sensative people in this forum can be when NT is critisized in any way.
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Well, any OS can and will have problems. If you like NT, you may want to stick with it. If youve got at least a 400MHz PII or equivalent and 128MB ram, you'll be fine. Win2k does reqire a good amount of ram to really run well, if your running at least 256 megs, you'll be in even better shape. Since your running CAD on your system, its probably well to do, but since I havent seen your specs, I cant rightly say.
In comparison with WinME, Win2k is perfect. 2000 has flaws, NT has flaws, Linux/Unix has flaws,...any OS will have problems. Really, if youve got 400MHz and 256megs of ram, your in pretty good shape.
Lets see your specs though, like clutch said.
In comparison with WinME, Win2k is perfect. 2000 has flaws, NT has flaws, Linux/Unix has flaws,...any OS will have problems. Really, if youve got 400MHz and 256megs of ram, your in pretty good shape.
Lets see your specs though, like clutch said.
no way dood. u are already running nt so your system is up to par.
many of the higher end cad systems (pro/e, sdrc) are starting to support directx, which we all know isnt supported by nt.
switching to w2k should give u a big performance improvement.
as far as games and stuff, more games are being written w2k compatible. therre are very few games that i would want to play that i cant on this system.
and microsoft keeps up[censored] compatibility.
many of the higher end cad systems (pro/e, sdrc) are starting to support directx, which we all know isnt supported by nt.
switching to w2k should give u a big performance improvement.
as far as games and stuff, more games are being written w2k compatible. therre are very few games that i would want to play that i cant on this system.
and microsoft keeps up[censored] compatibility.
Hello people
The specs of my system are as follows.
600 pent
Assus P3BF Motherboard
256 of ram
Matrox G400 32MEGS of ram AGP
9 GIG 7200 RMP Maxtor
Soundblaster Soundcard
The reason why I posted this letter was I wanted to go to win 2000 because it sounded like the perfict OS. I could use some of my cad software, not all will run on win2000 yet, and play more games, but I shyed away when I saw all the problems it is having. Im not saying that it is a bad opperating system I believe it will be a very good one in the future, but to me Microsoft could of done a better job on 2000, to limite all the bugs on such a high end OS. when it first realeased it.
The specs of my system are as follows.
600 pent
Assus P3BF Motherboard
256 of ram
Matrox G400 32MEGS of ram AGP
9 GIG 7200 RMP Maxtor
Soundblaster Soundcard
The reason why I posted this letter was I wanted to go to win 2000 because it sounded like the perfict OS. I could use some of my cad software, not all will run on win2000 yet, and play more games, but I shyed away when I saw all the problems it is having. Im not saying that it is a bad opperating system I believe it will be a very good one in the future, but to me Microsoft could of done a better job on 2000, to limite all the bugs on such a high end OS. when it first realeased it.
I was dual-booting Windows NT 4.0 and Windows 98 SE until I re-formatted my hard disk drive and installed Windows 2000 Professional as my only operating system in March 2000.
I have not regretted my decision.
In general, Windows 2000 Professional has all the advantages and none of the disadvantages of Windows NT 4.0 if the software and device drivers that you require will function under Windows 2000 Professional.
If you disable Windows File Protection, the device driver installation problems are not too bad either.
I have not regretted my decision.
In general, Windows 2000 Professional has all the advantages and none of the disadvantages of Windows NT 4.0 if the software and device drivers that you require will function under Windows 2000 Professional.
If you disable Windows File Protection, the device driver installation problems are not too bad either.
Yes, Win2k does have some problems, but they are not nearly as widespread as you seem to believe. Of course you see the problems on this message board, but what do you expect? In my experience, the most common 'bugs' are due to human error, rather than a fault of the OS.
It's not like people are going to post "My computer hasn't needed to reboot in 6 months, under win98 I had to reboot every 2 hours. How do I fix my win2k to be like win98?"
The people that are most vocal are the ones having problems. This would be a pretty boring message board if everybody was talking about problems they weren't having! But trust me, there are FAR more people running stable and hassle-free on Windows 2000 than there are who have problems.
My advice to you: limit your review of win2k to the experiences of people with similar hardware and software as you. You're right that compatibility can be an issue, so just research it beforehand. If people with setups like yours aren't having problems, then most likely you won't either, and I'll bet you will like Win2k a lot more than nt4 (I know I do).
It's not like people are going to post "My computer hasn't needed to reboot in 6 months, under win98 I had to reboot every 2 hours. How do I fix my win2k to be like win98?"
The people that are most vocal are the ones having problems. This would be a pretty boring message board if everybody was talking about problems they weren't having! But trust me, there are FAR more people running stable and hassle-free on Windows 2000 than there are who have problems.
My advice to you: limit your review of win2k to the experiences of people with similar hardware and software as you. You're right that compatibility can be an issue, so just research it beforehand. If people with setups like yours aren't having problems, then most likely you won't either, and I'll bet you will like Win2k a lot more than nt4 (I know I do).
That will be pretty good, you may consider upping your ram a little if you notice a slowdown in performance, as Win2k is probably a little more robust than NT. Ive never run NT before, so I cant say, but you are in a good position with your specs.
This is a problem solver message board so 90% of the messages are about problems... and 9% just junk. If this was a message board of ppl who have no problems then most messages would be like:
"I have no problems, system is running well"
I wanna see many ppl visiting that boad
I know a guy who runs CAD with 128 Ram and P3-733, G450, Win2k pro, he says that his system works very well with no flaws.
After all it is all in how much effort you spend seting up the system and leaving it alone. Basicaly if you do a setup and then DON'T **** with drivers it should run fine for a long time.
"I have no problems, system is running well"
I wanna see many ppl visiting that boad
I know a guy who runs CAD with 128 Ram and P3-733, G450, Win2k pro, he says that his system works very well with no flaws.
After all it is all in how much effort you spend seting up the system and leaving it alone. Basicaly if you do a setup and then DON'T **** with drivers it should run fine for a long time.
