Does Win2K suck?

[smp]

I'm thinking that it really does... I mean, fine, I only installed it last night, but I've had unexplained crashes since and just weird stuff. I think part of it is to blame on Radeon drivers, cause I'm getting weird graphical things happening when I play with settings, the text just turns into gibberish.. wierd. Then it'll just freeze up too. The other thing that sucks about it is it's speed, DAAAAAAAAAAAAMN, it's slow.. boot up is two times (if not more) longer than my previous 98 installation.. this using up of resources (if indeed this is what's happening) is a microsoft trademark.. I just fvckin baught this system in late December, 256 megs of ram was more than enough back then, but it seems.. I don't know.. I installed the 4.28's, and I installed the busmaster too, I couldn't figure out wether I should or not, so I just did, maybe that is a problem too.. I don't know, if you are having bad experiences, reply, if you are having good ones, reply.. thanks.

 

[Shudder]

If you don't like it, don't use it. Your loss.

Sure the bootup may take 2-3 times longer, but given the fact that it doesn't ever really lockup, you don't need to reboot just to get "system resources" whatever scam in 98 that is, and it just runs better, it's well worth it.

 

[smp]

see, I keep hearing that it's the kick ass windows OS now.. but.. I can't help but notice that when I got to the operating system forum, all these problems.. Microsoft didn't really take the time to get some things cleared up before releasing I think.. and I think that my Radeon + soundblaster + via is causing some problems too.. maybe not... I don't know, that's why I started this thread, to see what other people's experiences are.. should I work on it, or scrap it for an NT + 98 dual boot?

 

[Shmorq]

This is one of the few posts I've read where someone prefers Win98 over Win2k. Give Win2K a try and learn to optimize it a little. Check out this tweak guide for Win2K plus many other OS's...

 

[apoppin]

smp, read my two current threads here.

I seem to be having related problems and it all points to a defective Radeon. I tried installing WIN2K on my second partition and I got the BSOD "Hardware Conflicts". My brand new Radeon is having basic hardware conflicts (in DOS - mouse not found with Max Blast Utitlity; in Windows 98SE - "Warning, No DVD Player).

Of course, my next step is to try an install WIN2K with my old ASUS SDR - I'll report back results tomorrow.

But got ahead and read my two threads and see if you are having other problems with your Radeon.

 

[ToBeMe]

I've got 2K and a Radeon and SBL......no problems whatsoever! If 2K is doing what you're saying, you've got old Radeon drivers or a bad install because almost everyone I talk to loves 2K!

 

It seems that people who migrate from Win9x to Win2k love it. You would love Spam too if you were forced to eat dog food for five years straight (bad analogy, but you get the point).

As for it being "rock solid" -- no way. NT 4.0 was pretty solid. After SP4 I never had any problems with it crashing. With Win2k, I am always having apps hang that are hard to kill. I never had to wait for an app to die under NT 4.0. Under 2k apps will die and just sit there until minutes later I get a dialog asking me if Win2k should kill the process.

Under NT I had plist and kill from the Resource Kit, which could nuke any process. I don't have them for Win2k and should probably get them.

Coming from the hell that is Win9x I can see how people think Win2k is so great, but I bet not many of the "rock solid" fan club ever used NT.

The fact is that 2k contains lots of new code and lots of bugs. If XP were not coming out so soon there is no doubt that the Service Packs for 2k would reach the double digits.

 

[Noriaki]

Win2k needs a few service packs...

ATi's driver development team is the biggest bunch of jackasses I've ever seen in this business. My system ran horribly with my Radeon compared to my V5-5500. Win2k does have a fairly large footprint, both Disk and Memory there is no denying that. As to Via, I use only a Via south bridge and an SBLive!, no Via north bridge though.

I don't think Win2k is as stable as WinNT4 is, and it's no where near the stability of Linux. But 2k does have much better stability, and a much more effecient kernel than Win9x by far.

If WinNT4 will run everything you want stick to it, but I would much rather Win2000 Pro over a Win98SE/NT4 dual boot, I think the convience/flexibility of Win2000 makes up for the loss in stability compared to WinNT4 for my use of it. Besides, you are running SP1 or maybe first release...WinNT4 didn't get really good until SP3 or SP4 at least. They are up to SP6 now....

Win2k needs some SPs before it's really good. But it's hugely better than Win98. It's not microsoft's ATi's driver monkies don't put any effort into Win2k.

 

[Rectalfier]

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management]
"LargePageMinimum"=dword:ffffffff


Make sure this is in your registry, all Athlons should use this. Also make sure your Sblive is not on a irq shared slot.

 

[vash]

My system specs:

AMD Thunderbird 1.0Ghz
Abit KT7
384 Megs of RAM
Windows 2000 Pro with SP1
Geforce2 GTS

I've had Windows 2000 running just fine for many, many months now. I would trade its additional couple of seconds of boot time for the stability that Windows 2000 gives me. To this day, the times when Win2k crashes is when I do something stupid and install a driver update that doesn't "fix" a problem that I'm having. Now that Win2k is stable, I'm not going to install any driver/BIOS update onto my system if I don't need it "fixed".

Here is the combination of install that I find works well:
1. Install Win2k
2. Install the VIA service Pack (choose whatever version you like)
3. Install your video driver
4. Install your sound card driver
5. Apply SP1
6. Apply the AMD registry key (listed in the post above this) and find the MS "hotfix" from their website (can't find it now, but search for "VIA AGP" and you should find a very small update).

I don't need the step 5 since my Win2k is "slipstreamed" (thanks to whomever started the thread around here a while ago). This setup leads me to be 100% happy with my setup allowing me to play any game (Unreal Tournamen, Quake3, Half-Life/Counter-Strike, NOLF, Diablo2, etc) and any application without a a hitch. Your mileage may vary.

Step #6 is important! Without these two updates, I could not get my games stable, but now that I have them its solid.

 

[ToBeMe]

Hmm, I had NT4 for quite a while before 2K.......I'll still take 2K any day! I don't have your app. problem so I can't really comment on that.........

 

[Jason Clark]

Smp, the OS is very solid, much more solid than any other windows os. Your problems are YOUR problems plain and simple Video card drivers, chipset drivers something. We run 12 servers at the office all 2k, the only time i ever reboot them is with a run away device driver, or something along those lines. Blaming the os is just not good form

 

<< I don't need the step 5 since my Win2k is &quot;slipstreamed&quot; >>


Care to point us to this thread?

 

[Brylord]

W2K is the most unforgiving OS I've ever seen. One mistake with a driver or application that it doesn't like and it can hose the whole system (and you'll be reinstalling the OS). I think for all its weakness 98 and ME aren't so bad. Take your HD format it with NTFS put in another computer and watch what happens (don't really do this unless your into reinstalling software). Now for son's computer where nothing ever changes (hardware) and I control the PC I wouldn't trade it for any software out now. Don't get me wrong I like the OS and for business stuff and basic computer stuff its great. The average guy who isn't swapping parts in and out of his system will like the stablity. Though setup properly Win 98 or ME doesn't really crash that much.

 

[Adul]

2 of 3 comps at home run Win2k only. My mom loves it. It is stable and does not give her any problems. Networking with it is great. I had also used win nt4 for years, and jump into win2k when it was available. While I do not think it is quite has stable has NT 4 SP6 is, it is definitely more stable then win98se is. Though I do ahve problems with my crappy abit board. PS/2 port is dying.

Brylord, you make it sound like the death wish was put on win2k. I find win2k to be much more forgiving then NT 4 was.

 

[RedShirt]

I just refomated a couple of days ago to ditch Windows 2000 and went back to 98SE. While I did like 2000, I did not like the lack of drivers for it. My ATI TV-Wonder add in card does not have working vid capture drivers.

It's not because 2000 sucks, it's because ATI sucks. Since they suck I was forced to go back to 98 just so I could videocapture.

ATI, take this &quot;money&quot; you are getting from your sales and &quot;use&quot; this money to make better drivers... You can &quot;pay&quot; your software engineers to make better drivers... If you don't have software engineers you can &quot;hire&quot; them with this &quot;money&quot; you are getting.

Edit: Typo

 

[TravisBickle]

2x as long to boot? who cares! I never reboot unless i've been fiddling with the hardware, i get a quick restore from the hibernate.
for your information i can use 2000 with 64mb. with 256 I will have 10 browsers open and still half that memory left.
i'm pig-ignorant about 2000 but I like it, that's all I need to know!

 

[Brylord]

Adul your right it is much more forgiving than NT 4. Thats because NT 4 isn't forgiving at ALL!! Seriously, I really do like W2K. I use W2k on two of my three home computers. Its just that for a hardware junkie, W2k can be VERY frustrating. Thank the Lord it installs quickly.

I think the networking component of W2k is just great. I was able to dial up and get on my works Novell Server very easily with it. Its great in with my home network as well. But lets not honeymoon it, it has some SERIOUS issues as well.

 

[loosbrew]

Rectalfier,

can you specify what that reg entry does?
thanks
loosbrew

 

[denon]

No, win2k is the best windows os to date.

 

[Lord Gwynz]

The great thing about W2K is that you don't have to reboot as often, especially when installing drivers or fiddling with network settings. Even making changes to the registry doesn't require a reboot. And it's nice having real security features in the file system and options like file/folder encryption and compression and disk striping/spanning, plus built-in networking stuff like web/ftp servers.

 

[rlism]

if smp wants smp, win2k is the best windows os available.

 

I don't really buy the whole reboot issue. Under NT 4.0 most of the time all you had to do was log out for changes to take effect. Sometimes NT would ask you to reboot when it was not at all necessary. It seems that 90% of the &quot;reboot fixes&quot; in Win2k are just Microsoft taking out the dialog that asks you to reboot.

I am waiting for them to really work on eliminating reboots. Installing four new device drivers on my NT notebook install last night took me four reboots. That's absurd. I know it's possible to install new drivers w/o a reboot, Linux does it. Why can't NT do it ~100% of the time???

 

[Verygreedy]

I agree

 

[Verygreedy]

with Dwell