PCA Forums

I have been using 98 for a long time. I have been reluctant to go to Win 2k because the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know and I personally hate acclimating to a new OS. Now I know 2K is not XP, but my girlfriend has XP and think it sucks...

However, I am now going through my umpteenth rebuilding 98 nightmare (and I wasn't even running overclocked - it just digested major parts of itself) and know that the next thing I will be doing is the format and clean install (AGAIN). I am getting way to old for this crap...

I use my PC for surfing and some gaming. I know I would probably have to buy more RAM, but wonder otherwise what the pros and cons of going to Win 2K are.

My rig:

Shuttle AK35GTR
XP2000+
256 PC 2100
GF4 Ti4200
Lite-On 16x burner
CD-Rom
Maxtor 40 gig
Maxtor 30 gig

Thanks

almost the same system I have running 2k here. I agree XP is awful. I have 2k on all my systems here. its a great OS.

Greg

I also have a nearly identical system and I have 0 issues with win2k - faster, more reliable and it never seems to break. I have it on both an oc'd ak35gt system and an oc'd P4 system

i would highly recommend it - you can get by with 256, but 512 is better, and win2k can actually use it - i have 512 mb in my amd system and 768 in my p4 system - i can tell the difference from 256 -

Desktop-wise, Win2K is identical to Win98. You'll find everything in the same places (except for settings - some of those have moved around a bit, like the Device Manager).

You'll find 2K to be a LOT more stable than 98. Also it'll perform better in apps that make use of multitaksing and multi-threading (like Photoshop). A misbehaved app will still cause a GPF or BSOD but Win2K usually survives it without requiring a reboot. You should ALWAYS reboot 98 after a GPF because (even though it may seem to be okay) you've likely corrupted your memory.

Fair warning if you're a power user: I would consider 256Mb the MINIMUM for a power user or serious gamer. If you use a ram hungry app (like Photoshop) or you like to have several windows open at the same time, I strongly recommend adding more memory.

I also strongly recommend a clean install as opposed to an upgrade (one place where XP shines - it handles upgrades better than 2K does in my opinion). You can try an upgrade first, but make sure your 98 system is clean and stable. Keep in mind that all the excess baggage you've collected in your 98 registry will carry over to the Win2K install.

You should also uninstall any of the following apps, since the 98 install won't work under Win2K and it'll cause problems after the upgrade. Just install them again later (some may require an update if they're old versions):

- Anti-virus programs
- Disk or system utilities that run in the background (like Norton Utilities)
- Scanner or Printer applications.
- Firewalls

Also, check all your devices and make sure you've got Win2K drivers for them. Download the latest driver and don't use the default Win2K driver.

I would also recommend you pull all your cards except for the video before doing the upgrade. Win2K will have an easier time upgrading if it doesn't have to deal with a lot of hardware. After it upgrades then install your cards one by one and have the Win2K drivers handy.



What most power users don't like about WinXP is that it compeltely changes the desktop, and nothing is where it used to be. However, you CAN disable the XP GUI completely and make it look and feel exactly like Win2K. Of course my point is if you're going to emasculate XP to remove all the bubble gum and eye candy, why not just install Win2K instead and do without the code bloat?

I would recommend upgrading IE to 6.0 after you install Win2K. 2K comes with 5.0 which is pretty outdated now, and not even properly supported by Windows update. 5.5 has always had a minor bug in it running under Win2K that corrupts pages written using CSS.

I'm running IE 6.0 on my Win2K systems and very happy with it.

Thanks All:


I would be doing a clean install. Otherwise I am too lazy to upgrade my OS. Guess I need to shop for more RAM.

Isn't the conventional wisdom now that one stick of 512 is better for overclocking than two 256?

Yes, common wisdom is definately leaning to one stick for overclockers.

There definately seems to be a stability issue sometimes when overclocking with multiple sticks.

Does W2K even have any cons?

well it is microsft software, so im sure if we dig.... LOL

Win2K doesn't really have any Cons compared to 98. Compared to XP or ME it has two IMO:

1) It doesn't have System Restore (which XP & ME does) and although it's a resource hog, it IS a handy thing to have. Doesn't bother me since I make a monthly Ghost image of my Win2K boot partition, and I also Ghost it before doing any major hardware or software changes.

2) Win2K has less of a self-repair ability than XP or ME. For instance Win2K rarely survives a mobo change while XP handles it rather nicely via the Repair option in the WinXP installation app.

However, I still prefer 2K over XP.

whoa. i guess i've used 2k to long. u mean u can swap a mobo, same Hd w/out using a controller and u don't hafta reformat? damn. that would be soooo nice.

Ya. I've done it several times in XP now, with some pretty different hardware. It's gone smoothly every time. I must admit that it's given me some grudging admiration for XP.

Last one was a mobo swap from an Epox Slot A mobo (VIA chipset) with onboard ATA66 controller to an Asus P3B-F Slot 1 mobo (Intel BX chipset) - about as different as night and day.

The secret is to boot XP from the CD and at the point when it asks if you want to do a new install or a repair, you pick repair. This forces XP to wipe the Device Manager and go through the last portion of the OS installation when it detects all the hardware.

Wow...thanks FP for that tidbit of info.

I used XP in the past, but went back to W2K Pro because I felt like XP had a "bloated" feel to it and I could care less about all the eye candy. However, I have been thinking about installing it on my secondary system, and its nearly time for a hardware upgrade(s) to that system.

but this doesn't work as well on 98 or 2k? wow, i haven't used much of XP, but from what i have i wasn't much more impressed then win2k. plus 2k seems stabiler. may just hafta get XP =) 10 bux ain't that bad... lol