More and more XP patches causing instability  | | | 
January 15th, 2002, 02:55 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
| | Not Really a Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 25,385
| More and more XP patches causing instability
| 
|  | |
January 15th, 2002, 03:01 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
| | the *Voice* in your Head
Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NY
Posts: 4,520
|
not surprised about all the patches being released. i'll let all you xp users beta testers get all the wrinkles out of the product before i would even recommend it to anyone.
and unless you really need the maximum gaming compability which xp claims to have, users would be best served using w2k. | 
| | |
January 15th, 2002, 03:06 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
| | Not Really a Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 25,385
| Quote: |
unless you really need the maximum gaming compability which xp claims to have
| max?
stick with win98 ...
XP still needs time to mature
not a bash on ms, by any means its a new and need time to stabilize
give it a SP or 2 and it should work out well
max stability regarding windows however, stick with win2k
if I play D2 LOD with XP I get a horribly irritating sound from my speakers when I go into a dungeon lol | |
| | |
January 15th, 2002, 03:14 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
| | The Mad Redhatter
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: NJ
Posts: 3,552
|
i agree. for RIGHT NOW, stick with 2k. it's still the most stable and relatively compatible windows. but, as you might recall, there were a lot of problems with 2k when it came out in 1999, and they've managed to stabalize it and make it work well.
i will give xp time. | |
| | |
January 15th, 2002, 03:24 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 4,698
|
Game compatibility??
In my experience, XP has no more compatibility with games then 2000 does.
That was the reason I installed XP... I might just go back to 2K and 98 dual booting...
Sean | |
| | |
January 15th, 2002, 03:35 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
| | ph34r t3h g04t
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Kingsford, MI
Posts: 19,545
|
Heh, I'm in the middle of doing a complete restructure on my computer. I was running dual 40GBs in RAID, but I didn't see a noticeable performance increase since I'm not doing what I bought it for anyway. So I'm putting four OSs on one and using the other as an all purpose data drive. Gonna quad boot RedHat, 2K, XP, and 98. All purpose machine if there ever was one. I've got XP on there now, after jumping through about fourteen hoops. We'll see what happens with the rest. 
-Whir | |
| | |
January 15th, 2002, 03:44 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
| | the *Voice* in your Head
Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NY
Posts: 4,520
|
>Game compatibility??
hey, those were microsoft's words...not mine 
don't play games much on my pc...last one was test drive from over a decade ago. getting mixed reviews from various coworkers re:xp & gaming...some say it works well (esp video perf) while others say, not really... | |
| | |
January 15th, 2002, 06:40 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Queen Creek, AZ
Posts: 1,480
|
It seems to come down to the point of.. It depends on the game...
UT has increased framerates...
Rainbox Six and Rogue Spear usin software video... (was hardware in 98se)
Jane's F/A-18 fails miserably..
M$ Combat flight sim. good as ever no noticeable change | |
| | |
January 15th, 2002, 06:49 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 473
|
Last edited by charmler : March 15th, 2002 at 03:05 AM.
| |
| | |
January 15th, 2002, 08:27 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
| | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: OH, USA
Posts: 781
|
I will tell you that I ran Win2K Pro first on my new machine, and it was very bad. When I went to XP, performance jumped by leaps and bounds, not to mention much better gaming compatibility.
XP beats Win2K in my book, but everyone has their opinions. | |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Most Active Discussions  | | | | |   Recent Discussions  | | | | |
 |
hardware
prices 
