tedjulian3

I never see any posts on here so I am thinking no one uses it anymore.
I just bought a used computer and the guy gave me the Win2000 CD with
it. Maybe I'll give it a try. I never used it before. I still use
Win98se. I have played with XP and hated it. I was just wondering
what 2K has over 98, or is it more like XP ?

Ted

hans muecke

Samstag 26 Mai 2007 16:51 (US Central Time)


On one of my machines I use W2k, because it was recommended to me, when I
needed a windows that focuses on stability (the machine is on 24/7 and I
found that all previous WINs I used had those "hanging issues" when they
where up for a longer time).
I`d say, that you will get the look of W98 with the security and stability
of NT. Not a bad thing at all ... :-)

Hans from Germany ... using Linux
--
2007/05/27 06:50
EDDS 270650Z 23007KT 9999 FEW035 SCT050 19/11 Q1001 NOSIG

bruce coryell

W2K and XP have almost the same kernel (W2K is NT 5.0; XP is 5.1. Does
anyone know what Vista is?). One concern is that M$ is starting to
scale back support for W2K, as they will start to do for XP as well in a
couple years. However, W2K and XP support almost the same software
programs, programs that require XP are rare. I use W2K on my laptop,
XP on my main machine, and I have a Linux box.

tedjulian3

Thanks for the info. And I thought this newsgroup was dead....
I like the sound of what you said. A 98 look alike with more
stability sounds good. I just hope they did not remove Dos like theu
did in early XP.

I am well aware of Win98 hanging after it's running for a long time.
I never understood that. I can run the computer for hours with no
problems, yet if I leave it on all night (just idling), it's really
unstable in the morning. I intentionally disabled all screen savers,
power management, and other stuff that would run when it's idling. I
also added more cooling fans thinking it was getting too hot. None of
this seemed to matter, and when I changed to another computer that one
did the same thing. That told me that it had to be windows.

All I can figure is that its caused by memory saturation.

Thanks

Ted

hans muecke

Sonntag 27 Mai 2007 14:39 (US Central Time)


Well ... it sorta seems like it is dead. Not much going on here.


I still can use the command prompt, but I`m not shure if that is DOS
(haven`t got into WIN very deep, since I only need it to run software
can`t get to work with Linux).


So WIN does a bad job here ... my LAN`s proxy server (SuSE10.0) is running
for 151 days now without any trouble. And that includes any software
updates that were installed automatically. Can`t do that with WIN ... but I
don`t want to do WIN-bashing here ...

W2k in my opinion is the best WIN ever, XP is good, but already too much on
the - as we in germany say - "clicki-bunti" side. If have taken a brief
look at Vista and it looks good for the eye, but I don`t see what all those
gadgets can achieve.

Hans from Germany
--
2007/05/27 19:50
EDDS 271950Z 36004KT CAVOK 15/10 Q0999 NOSIG

bruce coryell

DOS is dead - the last gasp of DOS was version 8.0 which was part of Win
ME (Win 95 had version 7.0 and 98 had version 7.1). The 9x versions of
Windows were based on 32 bit DOS kernels, hence the above version
numbers. The NT-type OS's (NT, 2000, XP and Vista)are all based on
totally different non-DOS kernels, with some DOS emulation added, which
is what you see in the command prompts in those OS's.

ddcc

Vista should be NT 6.0 according to user agents.

tedjulian3

I just got a computer with Win2K on it. I was really not intending to
switch to Win2K, I just needed a faster computer. I went from a
500mhz to a 1000mhz. This used computer was purchased from one of
these reseller guys who sell a complete system, minus the monitor,
keybooard, mouse and printer. It comes with the OS included. He
installed Win2k, but does not include the installation CD, so if I
actually was to use Win2k, and it screwed up, I would not be able to
repair or reinstall it. This makes little sense to me, but I suppose
everyone that buys from him gets a copy of the same installation,
which means it's registered to everyone but no one in particular. He
also said he included "office suite", but it's a shareware thing
called "Open Office".

I'm not really complaining, because it cost less to buy the whole
computer than to buy a new motherboard and cpu for my old one, plus I
get memory, a 10gig hard drive, floppy and cd drive too. So it was
worth the money. But if I was to seriously use Win2k, I'd be stuck
with that small 10 gig hard drive because I cant install Win2k on a
larger drive without the install CD.

This did allow me to play with Win2k (for the first time), and it does
look similar to Win98. My plan is to just take the drive from my old
computer (Win98) and drop it in this new one. However, I decided to
keep the installation of Win2K on that hard drive and if I want to
play with it more, I can just swap drives.

I do not see how I could actually use Win2k if it does not allow me to
run my old Dos apps. I can see that the drive is formatted to NPNT
(something like that), rather than Fat32, so that tells me I cant run
my dos apps. I suppose I could dual boot to another secondary hard
drive but that all seems like its probably more trouble than its worth
since I am happy with Win98, which runs both Windows and Dos just fine
for my needs.

Ted

hans muecke

Freitag 01 Juni 2007 15:04 (US Central Time)


I don`t think I`m wrong here, when I say that that is sorta suspicious.
Nearly every computer you buy from a reseller has to come with one original
WIN cd (the one it was originaly purchased with). If the guy sells all his
computers with an os installed from the same cd ... guess that`s product piracy.


Open Office is not shareware, it is free (besides any costs for downloading
it for example). It is a really good office suite, that is capable of doing
all the stuff you can do with M$ Office and you can load and save in the M$
format.
Which version did you get?

Hans from Germany
--
2007/06/02 15:20
EDDS 021520Z 26005KT 9999 BKN024 BKN120 16/15 Q1020 NOSIG

tedjulian3

Hi Hans

I sort of thought these should be a CD with it. There is a sticker on
the side of the case with the reg. key for it, but no CD. Since it
came on a 10gig hard drive, I'd almost want to immediately put a
larger HD in it. I could put a slave drive, but I'd like at least 20
gigs on C:, because everything wants to install to C:
O course without the CD, I cant do that.
I dont believe I can copy drive to drive with Win2k. (I may be
wrong). With Win95 or 98 this can be dont on a FAT or FAT32
partition, and I have done it. I dont doubt this is piracy, the
seller seems sort of crooked, and for all I know, everyone gets that
same product reg. key. I am going to bug him about getting a cd.

I think I am going to get some of those slides that allow a HD to be
slid in and out, This way I can run my usual Win98 drives but switch
to this Win2k drive when I want. Win2K does look like something I'd
like to play with, but I still need my dos stuff.....
For all I


OK, I heard of it. I did not know. I have not yet even tried it. So
far I have only played with the OS, and modified the desktop so I
could use the thing. I've been accused of running Win98 like Win3.x.
I always want everything accessible from the desktop, so I had to add
lots of shortcuts. I have never liked the start button, in fact the
only time i use it is to shut down. I dont know what version I have
yet, but I am glad to hear its a good program. I might even see if I
can install that on my 98 setup. I have never owned MS Office, I just
use Wordpad for writing docs and for a database I still use my old dos
stuff. For graphics I still love Paint Shop Pro. I used that since the
very first version for Win3.x. Ted