You could easily run 2K on it.
 
And in all honesty, it'd run very well. NT4 would (probably) be a bad choice, as it's limited in it's hardware support for new equipment(the lack of USB being the key point I'm referring to).
 
your V3 would run perfectly well on it..and if you install DX8a, you should notice very little difference in performance in games-which are graphics intensive, as may be Autocad as well, but I've never used it.
 
Since games AREN't your concern...video performance of a few FPS won't matter to you anyway
 
Go for 2000
 
 
 
------------------
My PC is warm. I think our fire wall is acting up.

yeah i would say go for 2k. The main concern for you is probably USB support, and since the world of graphics design especially CAD changes very rapidly new programs and/or devices might not work in NT4 if they are USB but would work in 2k. Plus NT4 is older than 98 so it would be more of a regression instead of an upgrade. Plus 2k will handle the amount of ram you have better than NT4 would.

Thanks a lot chaps, you have put my doubts to rest.
 
Windows 2000 Pro it is.
 
Cheers

baaahahahaah
definitely w2k (nt would be better than 98)
i wouldnt run our pro/e or cimatron on anything else.
 
if set up properly u should notice a substantial increase in video and processing speed

I'd say go to NT.
 
Its tried and tested - SP6, stable.
 
In my experience, Windows 2000 is not there yet. Its got some nice bells and whistles but if your livelyhood depends on it - stick with NT
 
Otherwise you could find yourself wasting a hell of a lot of time (and money) trying to get it anywhere near as good as NT.
 
I've got two machines, workstation NT, laptop W2K.
 
Believe me, I've tried twice to put W2K on my workstation and yet again I've gone back to NT - it just works !
 
If you want UTTER stability, NT is the choice.

Also, let me add that when I said I tried to install W2K TWICE on my workstation, the first time I tried was an absolute nightmare, up[censored] bios', scsi drivers etc etc. I did get it to install eventually but then I wasn't impressed with the performance (W2K is slower than NT4 in my experience).
 
The second time I tried (approximately 8 months later) I had to upgrade loads of software, certain things still did not work 100%. The performance still wasn't impressive (any better). And I also started not to trust the W2K to perform without a hitch when it came to 'working under pressure' (my workstation is my livelyhood).
 
Finally, I was getting serious performance problems over my LAN which was the last straw(when I went back to NT, the problems disappeared !).
 
I'm sure I'll go to W2K one day, but for now I'd rather wait until it gets to around SP3/4 before I 'waste' a whole more bunch of time.
 
The applications I run are;
 
3DS Max, Lightscape, Photoshop, Illustrator etc (heavy graphics programs).
 
BTW, when I did install the ONE game I had on W2K (Fight Simulator 2000) it kept crashing !!
 
Nah, if your work is in AutoCAD, go to NT4 ! EVERYTHING JUST WORKS (don't waste your time !)

zigzig - it seems your experience w. win2k is rather limited, maybe you shouldnt spread your opinions like they were facts

No facts ?? Yeah right. I just made them all up. And I'm the only one who has had problems with W2K, right ??
 
My opinion (NOT FACT) - if you are going from W98 to W2K you'll probably think W2K is great. If you are USED to NT4 and you go to W2K you'll probably say "Why the F*?$ is this running so bad ?" and then you'll spend a big bunch of time trying to get in W2K what you had in NT.
 
Now the FACTS.
 
Go today and try to buy an IBM Intellistation ZPro, a top of the range Visualisation workstation, tell them you need the machine to do intensive graphics work, with performance and stability. You'll get recommended to have NT on it rather than W2K.
 
Funny that ?
 
Maybe my 'Dealer of the year' gets it wrong too with their recommendations (NT over W2K)?? And they have FAR FAR more experience than I (FACT).
 
So why is this ?? Because there are still too many issues with W2K FOR THE SERIOUS USER to contend with rather than just getting on with REAL work.
 
Just trying to save Pikey the RISK of wasting lots of time.
 
If he wants USB and to play games, then NT is NOT for him (FACT).
 
So, if you are so smart, give us YOUR FACTS Nagual ;-)

Many companies who rely on computers for their livelyhood have made the jump to Windows 2000 without any problems.
If Windows 2000 "wasn't quite there yet" or 'Basically un-reliable" do you think I would have gone out and rolled out 3 Windows 2000 servers and then gone on an aggressive upgrade program to Win2k on the workstations?
If I felt for one minute that Windows 2000 was going to be a problem in any form and I'm talking about small bugs or issue too I would have stuck to WinNT.
I did the research, I did the testing.
Windows 2000 provides massive uptime compared to WinNT (My main Win2k server currently has 6 months continuous uptime without a re-boot).
Windows 2000 give me near 100% compatibility with the applications we use throughout the company, has proven to be 95% compatible with hardware (for some reason it doesn't seem too keen on the Intel 810 chipset, but hay who was?).
Both mine and the company I work for's livelyhood depends on computer systems and I'll recommend Win2k over WinNT in 99% of the situations.
My supliers are in a very similar situation, I've yet to speak to one who recommends I go for WinNT over Win2k.
I run a LAN here which I am sure is more complex then the one you had "Serious Problems" with.
What with AD installed across 3 Domain controllers, not to mention the LINUX servers needing to talk to the Windows systems.
I have one issue at the moment, pretty minor and I know exactly how to fix this issue.
Once I can schedule in 30 minutes of downtime for one server whilst AD is removed, computer re-named and AD re-installed all will then be working perfectly.
 
The adoption rate of Win2k has been pretty amazing with many hardened Novell administrators now swaying over to the MS OS's.
 
To be blunt and to the point, Win2k = Serious Problems - My *** !
 
[This message has been edited by BladeRunner (edited 19 February 2001).]

"Go today and try to buy an IBM Intellistation ZPro, a top of the range Visualisation workstation, tell them you need the machine to do intensive graphics work, with performance and stability. You'll get recommended to have NT on it rather than W2K.
 
Funny that ?
 
Maybe my 'Dealer of the year' gets it wrong too with their recommendations (NT over W2K)?? And they have FAR FAR more experience than I (FACT).
 
Mabye your "Dealer of the year". Is just that. A Dealer. Is he a tech? Does he KNOW his ****? or does he just read the specs on the machine like any customer would? How the heck do you know he has more experience than you do? Do you know him? Geesh, I can stick Gomer Pile in front of a computer with a Microsoft Technet CD and he can answer just about any error message a user would have with NT (By-the-book).
 
"So why is this ?? Because there are still too many issues with W2K FOR THE SERIOUS USER to contend with rather than just getting on with REAL work."
 
Each user has different uses. I don't see Microsoft touting Windows 2000 as the end-all-be-all of Multimedia OS'S. In fact they still recommend 9x for that. Is it Microsoft's fault that your crappy graphics progs don't work in Windows 2000. NO. Yes, I do say CRAPPY because if the company you bought it from was worth their $$$ they would have had it working BEFORE 2000 came out. Microsoft is VERY good at informing Companies on how to make their software. So go right ahead. Blame Microsoft like everyone else does. ;(
 
"Just trying to save Pikey the RISK of wasting lots of time."
 
Wasting lots of time? He wants to play games and he wants to do a little graphics work. If he sticks by the compatibility list his graphics will work just fine.
 
 
"If he wants USB and to play games, then NT is NOT for him (FACT)."
 
USB works fine. If the manufacturer of your part doesn't have a driver for your part that's THEIR problem NOT Microsoft's. If you stick by www.ntcompatible.com compatibility list then you'll be fine for games.
 
 
Seems to me that YOU don't know how to pick your parts. You take companies by their word that this or that will work fine in Windows. Well guess what? IT'S ALMOST NEVER BEEN LIKE THAT!!!! GO BUY A MAC. It runs graphics just fine and as all the Mac Zealots are fond of saying Photoshop is faaaaaaaaassssttt. Oh and as for stability well I guess you won't find it there either. Go find yourself an SGI workstation or something. Obviously 2000 is too hard for you. ;(

BTW, Pikey was not talking about Servers, just a workstation, running AutoCAD (an application I have USED for years)
 
So,.......
 
Funny then that today, as coincidence would have it - my fresh W2K installation started to play up.
 
I couldn't log on as Administrator.....
 
"Windows cannot load the locally stored profile......An i/o operation initiated by the registry failed unrecoverably !!!!".
 
How do you get around that ??
 
And coicidence or what ??
 
THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED EVER IN NT !!
 
If YOU'VE have NO problems, then fine, I'm happy for you.... but that doesn't exclude those of us who continue to have untold problems with it.
 
Believe me, I'd love to have W2K (I like its features), I was one of the first in the queue to get a copy and go for it, but I won't try it again on my main machine until I am a lot lot more confident that it'll work just as well as what I've got.
 
My confidence has been eroded. I have spent so much time, 'testing' things, downloading drivers, upgrading software, that I cannot keep spending this amount of time.
 
And believe me, I have spent so much time testing, comparing application performances - I have really tried - but I've had too many problems.
 
BTW, how much time do you think I wasted trying to get around the above problem today and do you think I could have done without it ??
 
My point to Pikey remains - You may be 'lucky' with W2K and have no problems. BUT, if you don't want to go through what I have had to go through (and continue to do so) AND if your livelihood depends on reliability, stability and NO FRILLS (USB, games etc), then my advice would be to go to NT.
 
Finally, just what sofware do the W2K workstations that you have installed W2K run (the Workstations - NOT the SERVERS) ??

To DOSFREAK,
 
What UTTER Baloney !
 
Discreet, the writers of 3DSMax upgrade this software every 18months, sorry if that doesn't coincide with Microsoft's worldwide domination plan....
 
Oh, I forgot also about ALL the upgrades and patches I had to wait for for my 3DSMax 'plug-ins'.
 
"Buy a Mac"......I'd LOVE to, if 3DS worked on the Mac OS I'd go tomorrow (if I could afford the software all over as well).
 
My dealer is the best out there for discreet products and ALL THE VIDEO COMPONENTRY (hardware and software) that goes with it. He could sell me either W2K or NT - chooses NT and they don't just read the spec sheet (we're talking UK dealers here). And YES, they are VERY technical (they have to be).
 
Re the IBM Intellistation, you can buy it with either W2K or NT. Its a top flight Visualisation Workstation - not a multimedia plaything.
 
As I said, SERIOUS APPLICATION'S USERS WILL STICK WITH NT (WHICH IS PROBABLY WHAT THEY HAD ANY WAYS).......People who want to play games, and open up their computers for a hobby so that they can woo over W2K (and assist Microsoft with getting the bugs out of it - to their cost) have probably come from W95 or W98 themselves.
 
"Seems to me that YOU don't know how to pick your parts."
 
Really ?? My NT machine has NEVER EVER LET ME DOWN - everything sings.
 
"You take companies by their word that this or that will work fine in Windows."
 
That's not true, writing's just not my strong point !
 
"Well guess what? IT'S ALMOST NEVER BEEN LIKE THAT!!!!"
 
And it never will whilst Mr Gates wants to rule the roost.
 
"GO BUY A MAC. It runs graphics just fine and as all the Mac Zealots are fond of saying Photoshop is faaaaaaaaassssttt."
 
I'd love to - see above.
 
"Oh and as for stability well I guess you won't find it there either."
 
Not according to my Mac Zealot friends.
 
"Go find yourself an SGI workstation or something."
 
SGI running Windows is not impressive.
 
"Obviously 2000 is too hard for you."
 
Yes it really is - what with 'MY Network PLACES" and 'Computers NEAR ME' - its all so technical.
 
LOL!!!!!

OK ZigZag just how/where do you work in the computer industry?
I'm interested because you seem to have been "shielded" from Windows 2000 and I'm pretty sure anybody actually working in the industry would have a lot more experience with this OS.
I just want to put things into perspective.
I work as a Sys Admin looking after a network of 3 Win2k Servers & w LINUX Servers.
This along side the 100+ workstations (approx. split 80/20 Windows/LINUX)
I'm yet to find a reputable software house recommend we use WinNT over Win2k for any application.
PhotoShop, works so much better under Win2k.
Solid Edge, which is massive design application, is a recommended Win2k application.
What exactly do you think the CEO would say to me if the systems/workstations went down on a regular basis?
'Oh don't worry, it's Win2k we expect it'
No, I would be shouted at until I have working workstations.
MY LIVELYHOOD is dependent on the OS I decide to impliment on workstations.
If I make the wrong choice after spending time and money then quite frankly I would be fired.
I haven't been because I have made the correct choice.
I continue to advocate to anybody asking.
There is no reason at all why you would choose WinNT over Win2k UNLESS the application you required the workstation for simply refused to run under Win2k.
In this situation you have only two choices.
1. Stick to the OS the software house tells you to use.
2. Upgrade to a more reputable piece of software from a company who understand Win2k exists.

Listen,
 
If you guys can sit there and say;
 
In W2K you'll have LESS failures, LESS problems, LESS issues AND it'll run faster, etc etc THAN NT, then fine - I believe you.
 
All I'm saying is that that is not what I experienced, it contained TOO MANY issues for me to WASTE a big bunch of time trying to fix.
 
AND....
 
I am still experiencing problems to this day with it installed on a laptop (DELL 3700, PIII 500mhz, 192mb RAM, 6Gb Disk).
 
My current machine is;
 
Dual 500mhz PIII,
Supermicro P6DGBU Motherboard,
512Mb RAM
2 x SCSI Seagate Cheetahs (9 & 18gb),
1 x SCSI Yamaha CDRW
1 x SCSI Plexor Player,
Matrox G400 Max
2 x 21" Monitors,
SCSI Scanner,
Wacom Tablet,
Intellimouse Pro Mouse,
Printers (2), iPaq H3630, 3Com Modem.
 
And, in MY experience, ALL MY applications run better on both the above machine AND the Laptop under NT (than under W2K).
 
When W2K is 'up there' I may try it again.
 
But, NOT BEFORE because I have been BURNT twice. In fact I am being burnt at this moment. But I need the USB (I am a Freelancer - Digital Camera).
 
If you read Pikey's email, my guess is that he is a USER, LIKE ME - and I guess he is NOT a Computer Engineer (I am not either).
 
But from the sounds of things you guys are in 'the Industry' (and to solve problems and find fixes).
 
I'm paid to USE 3DS Max effectively.
 
I'm sure I will one day upgrade from NT to.... what and when ?? Who knows !!
 
P.S. Can anyone of you W2K advocators explain, why today I've suffered 3 blue screens in W2K (the Laptop has NEVER bluescreened under NT) AND also, can ANYONE tell me WHY in W2K I could not log back in as Administrator - see my previous message). All 1sts on this machine using W2K !
 
I look forward to your 'fixes' (ho hum) !!

Another vote for W2k

The easy explaination for your problems is that you didn't set it up right.
 
The graphics industry is the slowest to accept any changes. I have to deal with these headaches constantly. It is due to the poorly written, proprietary garbage most of these companies call programs. This is especially true for small market, specialized programs.
 
Graphics hardware follows the same thinking. They produce poorly managed hardware that works in only perfect conditions. Wacom tablets are a great example of this. As are slide scanners, tablet scanners, and most digital camera interfaces.
 
You have commented on how the graphics package you use is constantly upgraded. This is because problems probably constantly occur. Take the Play Trinity TV editor for example. After several years they have finally brought out a somewhat stable, marginally usable system. What OS do they recommend? Windows NT 4.0 sp5. Why? Because in order to recommend anything else they would have to a) actually test their software on another platform and b.) hire some competent programmers to not only fix the glaring problems they still have but take advantage of a new OS.
 
I have a feeling your problems come from not having the correct drivers for your hardware. Specifically for the SCSI interfaces. As for the problems with your Dell laptop, I'd have to say user inexperience. I've seen several successful installations on the same laptops. And I've had nothing but success with the Dell equipment we use.
 
I think where everyone has a problem with your comments is the fact that you try to bring them across as law. I'd say that you are the exception. Most rollovers to Windows 2000 work very well.
 
And in the case of AutoCAD, I haven't been told of any issues from anyone I know running it. Worst case senario, give Win2K a try. If it doesn't work out, Microsoft has a return policy just like any other software producer.

..
 
[This message has been edited by nagual (edited 20 February 2001).]

zigzag : the last post is just what i was coming too, im glad you came around
i could mention that i personally installed win2k on about 10 different hw-platforms (admittadely w. some issues but those were due to my ignorance NOT to win2k) and also encountered a lot of installations of win2k in my work. i also worked w. nt4 (ws/srv) for a long time.
and i still say that win2k is da b0mb

i just finished an evaluation of w2k for the highend cad/cam systems at work. i decided to change everything over to w2k.
(pro/e, cimatron, sdrc, command)