• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Would W2K make better use out my hardware, for gaming purposes?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Bigbooty:

You probably used express install. Just checked for some info on SP2:

The express installation automatically detects which files need to be updated and then copies the appropriate files to a temporary folder on your computer. It then installs those files and updates your computer.

Note Internet Explorer 5 is installed with Windows 2000. If you use a Web browser other than Internet Explorer 5 or later, you might be unable to install Service Pack 2 with the express installation option. You can still install Service Pack 2 by downloading the entire service pack from the Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack Web site to your computer and running W2ksp2.exe locally.


I don't use IE: I use Opera 5.0 (for speed) and Mozilla 0.9 (AKA Netscape 6).
I've cable access so 100mb wasn't a problem. Thanks for the clarification. 😉
 
MichaelD,

You should have no problems with files created in FAT32. In fact, though I wouldn't recommend it, you can install Win2k on a FAT32 drive.

I have a scanner, burner, dvd player, raided hard drives, etc. No problem whatsoever. You have a pretty new setup, so I seriously doubt that you run into any problems either.

Go with the dual boot. Give Win2k a chance (cause it does feel a little wierd at first). You will probably run into a few quirks (mainly because you're just used to Win98". After getting it all set up and going, I can almost guarantee you that you'll go strictly Win2k. 🙂
 
Afropick,

Thank you for your intelligent answers and honest opinions. I'm gonna do a little more research tonight. Mainly, I'm going to check on the hardware/software that I have to ensure that it's W2K compatible. Have a great evening. 🙂
 
MichaelD,

I got the same doubt right now. I installed winme but I'm getting sick of bsod's (just click on my system rig to see it's name).

I recently "acquired" win2k pro and I was also looking for info on this forum. I'm still backing up my stuff and I'll probably install win2k this weekend...let's see how it goes.


breakapart
NT has always given me the impression of being: Blocky, simple, reliable, and boring.

I work with nt4 too and I feel EXACTLY the same about it hehe.
 
Hey Mike,

Go to 2k, you will LOVE IT...

I took about 3-5 FPS second hit in all of my games... but hey! I have much more stability.. and security..

Memory management is awesome..!

Bryan
 
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Bryan. I appreciate the response.

Phiberoptix, If you do it, please tell me how it went. PM me, email me, post here, whatever. Thanks.
 
OK, now here's another thought. If I do go to W2K, do I buy the full OS or the "Upgrade from Win98" version. I "know" what the diff is, but I don't KNOW what the diff is. I have the FULL version of Win98SE (about the only good thing that came with my Dell!) And it always installs perfectly whenever I need to reformat because I screwed uuu....I mean whenever I need to. Opinions please?
 
hi, I´m back.

I´ve installed win2k today ( I was going to install yesterday, but real world entertainment got in the way lol). I was wondering what would be the best (and relatively painless) way to upgrade win. I was going to dual boot at first, but then I wouldn´t get ntfs, which I wanted. And there was all that mess of sharing the same app between the oses, so I went to upgrade everything.
After about 2 hours installing the os and converting the files to ntfs, the system finally booted. Win2k installation gives you a kind off "what went wrong.txt" where it lists the programs that needed to be installed again in order to work again. tip: no matter what it says, try every app you have, ´cause I found that this report was not too accurate. ex. one app that it said that wouldn´t work (sisoft sandra) is running without problems. Some others passed win2k self test but failed when I tried to run´em.
It´s still a bit early to say "wow, it is so much better". But it feels sturdier and more reliable. Oh yeah, slower too, lol. Must be that I "only" have 256mb of ram. I have 256 more, but they are generic crap and I don´t want to mix ´em with my crucial. I´ll put it later to see if there are any major improvements.
I still haven´t got a chance to play too much, but I tried some UT and it works great (less fps because of radeon´s win2k drivers).
So far the adaptation process is going well. I really enjoyed the stability (been running this beast for 3 hours without an bsod´s lol) and this profile thing (I have my own desktop and mydocuments folder and my brother has his own)... I don´t think that I could do this with win9x.

But I just installed it. I´ll post more impressions later. Hope this helps somehow 🙂

later!
 
When Win2k was put on my machine a few months ago, it was a fresh install with NTFS. Were I to do it again, I'd setup a dual boot.

For older games, mostly DOS-based, you will most likely have problems. However, newer games should be able to run under Win2k, depends a lot on the company. With the newer major releases, they should work fine in Win2k (there I go, shoulding all over myself...).

What I've found to be the case is that games don't seem to age too well. In other words, I don't find myself going back to play older games when there are newer better looking games out I'd rather spend my time with. Hmmm, Doom or Unreal Tournament? And yes, UT works fine in Win2k.

With titles like Max Payne, Soldier of Fortune 2, Duke Nuke'em Forever coming out, will this be an issue? Guess we'll have to wait and see.
 
Back
Top