|
-
Jun 23rd, 2001, 11:35 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Hyperactive Member
WinME or WinXP??
I have to choose between WinXP or WinME... Which one should I get to do development and using Multimedia API like DirectX and video acceleration (DVD-ROM and others) 
Thanx in advance...
SXDev
-
Jun 23rd, 2001, 11:56 AM
#2
Monday Morning Lunatic
Considering that XP isn't out yet, at the moment you have to go for ME 
I would suggest XP if you can wait because it's based on the Win2K core, and is supposed to be a lot more stable, as well as fully 32-bit
I refuse to tie my hands behind my back and hear somebody say "Bend Over, Boy, Because You Have It Coming To You".
-- Linus Torvalds
-
Jun 23rd, 2001, 12:42 PM
#3
Addicted Member
-
Jun 23rd, 2001, 02:02 PM
#4
Isnt there supposed to be a 64Bit version of XP?
-
Jun 23rd, 2001, 02:04 PM
#5
Monday Morning Lunatic
Yes. But XP is based around an NT-derivative core, so there's no 16-bit code in it apart from the DOS virtual machine. WinME is still a Win9x base.
I refuse to tie my hands behind my back and hear somebody say "Bend Over, Boy, Because You Have It Coming To You".
-- Linus Torvalds
-
Jun 23rd, 2001, 03:12 PM
#6
XP Anyday. If you can't wait, or can't afford, download the Beta for free
-
Jun 23rd, 2001, 10:12 PM
#7
Frenzied Member
I say get 2000 now, forget about the steaming pile of bloatware they call Windows XP.
I'm bringing geeky back...
-
Jun 23rd, 2001, 11:54 PM
#8
Thread Starter
Hyperactive Member
I have the beta version or WinXP and I know that Win2K is good but, it's based on WinNT core. WinNT core doesn't support DirectX and some others acceleration features. A friend of mine tried WinXP beta and didn't find any bugs so, I don't know but, you guys recommended me to use WinXP... Well, I can't wait and I guess I can't afford it so, let's go with XP Beta...
Thanks alot guys...
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 12:28 AM
#9
Frenzied Member
Originally posted by mastermind94
I have the beta version or WinXP and I know that Win2K is good but, it's based on WinNT core. WinNT core doesn't support DirectX and some others acceleration features. A friend of mine tried WinXP beta and didn't find any bugs so, I don't know but, you guys recommended me to use WinXP... Well, I can't wait and I guess I can't afford it so, let's go with XP Beta...
Thanks alot guys...
Windows XP is also based on the NT core
Of course Win2000 has DirectX support, Windows NT 4 doesn't...one of my friends is a diehard gamer and he uses 2k the only gaming probs it has is with older games
wanted to clear that up
I'm bringing geeky back...
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 12:46 AM
#10
Thread Starter
Hyperactive Member
Yeah... I don't want to get Win2K because, I never spent money on an opering system other than Linux. I got all my Windows copies from friends/relatives I'll see that... I decided to install WinXP and WinME on the same machine and choose...
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 01:21 AM
#11
Hyperactive Member
I'll just stick my hand up here and say: I have bought every windows operating system since 3.0. And I have always been happy with them except for ME. It's the biggest rip off on earth. I have "downgraded" a number of my machnes to 98 SE because it has far better driver support. Trust me in this ME, sucks. It adds few features, but alot of games don't run on it...... so why not run Windows 2000?
SD
"I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy!"
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 04:51 AM
#12
Addicted Member
I agree - I've downgraded too.
ME is just plain stupid - drivers don't work, it crashes even more than Win98, and to top it all off, the help files are c_r_a_p:
If you look on them, you'll see a topic on how to load your computer without loading Windows... then, lower down in the topic, it says, "Please note you cannot load your computer without loading WIndows" - duh!
ME is a ripoff - they rushed it out and it shows that they did.
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 05:02 AM
#13
Hyperactive Member
That's a good one!
"how to load your computer without loading windows..." I'll look that up next time Windows doesn't start...
Visual Basic 6.0 Enterprise
Visual C++ 6.0 Professional
Wak 
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 05:37 AM
#14
Monday Morning Lunatic
*grin* 
Win2000 has DirectX 8 support, so no problems there The only games that won't run well or at all are those that try direct hardware access (especially older ones).
I refuse to tie my hands behind my back and hear somebody say "Bend Over, Boy, Because You Have It Coming To You".
-- Linus Torvalds
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 06:32 AM
#15
Frenzied Member
I'm bringing geeky back...
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 06:42 AM
#16
Addicted Member
It's ridiculous! It's as though they copied the Win98 help files, changing Win98 to WinME and then didn't edit it !!
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 06:44 AM
#17
Monday Morning Lunatic
Hehehe Oh well, looks like a good bet for not going for ME then
I refuse to tie my hands behind my back and hear somebody say "Bend Over, Boy, Because You Have It Coming To You".
-- Linus Torvalds
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 06:45 AM
#18
Addicted Member
Yip 
ME is pants.
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 10:00 AM
#19
Thread Starter
Hyperactive Member
Bill Gay-tes said himself that WinME is more fun to use and will be more stable than Win98... Is that true or simply a marketing thingny???
So, awright, ME is no good...
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 01:37 PM
#20
originally posted by Wak
"how to load your computer without loading windows..." I'll look that up next time Windows doesn't start
that is the same thing as hitting START to shutdown,
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 01:47 PM
#21
Monday Morning Lunatic
I never shut my PC down..... I've only seen the boot menu twice in the past 3 weeks - I only restart it
I refuse to tie my hands behind my back and hear somebody say "Bend Over, Boy, Because You Have It Coming To You".
-- Linus Torvalds
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 05:43 PM
#22
transcendental analytic
I never even restart in XP i can do hibernate which saves my memory on HDD and loads it back when i turn it on again. (it works alot faster but with 256M RAM it takes some 8 seconds)
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Jun 24th, 2001, 05:46 PM
#23
Monday Morning Lunatic
Yeah, well you just try running Win98 for more than a week then
I refuse to tie my hands behind my back and hear somebody say "Bend Over, Boy, Because You Have It Coming To You".
-- Linus Torvalds
-
Jun 25th, 2001, 10:11 AM
#24
Thread Starter
Hyperactive Member
Is WinXP takes alot of ressources??? What is the recommended system configuration so far?
-
Jun 25th, 2001, 10:24 AM
#25
Simple answer. WinME is aweful. Locks up more than anything else I have ever used. Very annoying. Im switching to a Windows 2000/Red Hat isntall this weekend when I get everything backed up.
-
Jun 25th, 2001, 10:47 AM
#26
transcendental analytic
WinXP has this cool feature, system checkpoints, you can shedule it to back up your system for instance once a week and if it crashes later on you can restore the whole system. I haven't tested it since my system never crashed but one of my friends had a crash when he installed lots of apps and system restore worked nice
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Jun 25th, 2001, 12:34 PM
#27
Frenzied Member
Originally posted by mastermind94
Is WinXP takes alot of ressources??? What is the recommended system configuration so far?
I think it is like 500mhz P3, at least 128 megs of RAM, 256 if you are using multiple users, 1.5 GB available disk space...it's crazy, and even then it is bloated...
Win2k runs fine with 96 megs, 350mhz, and takes 500 megs disk space, and it is better and less full of $hit
WIN 2000 4 LIFE
I'm bringing geeky back...
-
Jun 25th, 2001, 12:50 PM
#28
Frenzied Member
I say go with DOS 6.2 you probobly already have all the memory you'll ever need. It will probobly load the whole os into your ram for blazzing speeds. DOS 6.2 is that way to go!
~~~Dimava~~~
NXSupport - Your one-stop source for computer help
-
Jun 27th, 2001, 03:54 PM
#29
transcendental analytic
I'd say XP runs much faster than 2000. if you don't need the flashy features, turn them off. XP need about 1G space, memory usage is about the same as in 2000.
dos is very nice os for a vb programmer
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Jun 27th, 2001, 04:03 PM
#30
Good Ol' Platypus
Did you know that they have an internet browser for DOS? It even supports javascript. I'm typing this in right now in DOS!!!
All contents of the above post that aren't somebody elses are mine, not the property of some media corporation. 
(Just a heads-up)
-
Jun 27th, 2001, 04:12 PM
#31
transcendental analytic
nope, can you post a screenshot?
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Jun 27th, 2001, 04:31 PM
#32
Originally Posted by Sastraxi
Did you know that they have an internet browser for DOS? It even supports javascript. I'm typing this in right now in DOS!!!
I also heard it will fit on a floppy, is that true? I have not tried it.
-
Jun 28th, 2001, 02:38 PM
#33
Fanatic Member
DOS: Love it, but only as a console for quickly executing some rename commands and such... I've been working with DOS since our first 8086, but I like Windows a lot more...
Win98: Good...
WinME: Win98 with a lot of extra bull****, on a scale of 1 to 10, I'd give it the number -20 
WinXP: Win2K with a lot of extra bull****, too slow, too annoying... so what if I turn everything off, that would leave me with just a slow version of Win2K 
Win2K: GREAT!! Love it!! Runs perfectly on my P133!!! Never even crashed!! My OS for life (well, at least until they release a better version that is, but not XP)...
And that's my opinion...
Teaudirenopossum.Musasapientumfixaestinaure.
(I can't hear you. There's a banana in my ear)
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|