Operating Systems (OS)?

bum · Post by **bum** » Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:56 am

i run windows xp with sp1. sometimes i get a few problems but thier just minor anoyances more than anything. and everything shopld be perfect once the full version of sp2 is released.

bubblehead · Post by **bubblehead** » Mon Jul 12, 2004 9:18 am

My dad's computer (the one I use for editing) is Windows XP Pro. Runs just fine and doesn't crash half as much as 98 did on my mom's computer. I think Windows is getting better generally. Used to be I'd have one program crash and the whole system would freeze.

My mom's computer runs Windows XP Home, the upgrade version. It used to be Windows 98 and now the sound card doesn't work with XP (though it always used to be if I played a CD it wouldn't work very well anyway).

Then there's a laptop that's 98 and always has been.

I also have some discs that my cousin made linux bootdiscs so that if my codecs were screwed up I might be able to play the fansubs on them anyway. I can play the fansubs normally, but if I try to boot Linux from them (I don't know what version) it doesn't work. ^^; Not a major problem.

Bakadeshi [AuN Studios] · Post by **Bakadeshi [AuN Studios]** » Mon Jul 12, 2004 11:27 pm

Pro is actually quite stable. Not sure about home edition, but Pro is based of NT kernel which is the same reason for win2000's stability.

Media Center is something diferent aswell, and I think its based off of Home edition, but I could be wrong on that. And yea Memory alot of times is the cause of system crashes. Especially when dealing with cheap DDR modules.

Nobody can tell me Win 2000 is more stable than XP Pro and be able to prove it. Infact XP is actually more backwards compatitble, especially for Gaming.

Windows 98 SE is the best windows that ever was before the NT based ones. Windows ME is a disaster microsoft should have never let loose. Win98 first edition was just as bad if not worse. And don't get me started on Win95

Scintilla · Post by **Scintilla** » Mon Jul 12, 2004 11:39 pm

Bakadeshi [AuN Studios] wrote:Pro is actually quite stable. Not sure about home edition, but Pro is based of NT kernel which is the same reason for win2000's stability.

I always thought that all versions of XP were NT-(and therefore 2000-)based...

Bakadeshi [AuN Studios] · Post by **Bakadeshi [AuN Studios]** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 12:23 am

Scintilla wrote:
Bakadeshi [AuN Studios] wrote:Pro is actually quite stable. Not sure about home edition, but Pro is based of NT kernel which is the same reason for win2000's stability.
I always thought that all versions of XP were NT-(and therefore 2000-)based...

Yea I'm not sure on that. I just don't think so because of how it behaves in comparison to Pro. You may be right, but in anycase it lacks alot of the stability featires Pro has, such as the ability to end a process from the task manager should it stop responding, without having to reboot the entire system.

AMVfreak · Post by **AMVfreak** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 12:49 am

Buying a Media Center Edition system worth it?
Is it better then pro?

Bakadeshi [AuN Studios] · Post by **Bakadeshi [AuN Studios]** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 1:22 am

AMVfreak wrote:Buying a Media Center Edition system worth it?
Is it better then pro?

Depends on what you want it for. Media Center is designed to be a multimedia station, so it lacks alot of Pro's feature, but also is optimized better for multimedia and for display on a TV screen.

If you also want the ability to have a web/ftp servr going, and edit webpages, play doom2, and work on your company's Visual C++ project, then Pro is probably better. But this is just going off of my information sources, I have not actually tried out Media Center yet.

DrngdKreationz · Post by **DrngdKreationz** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 6:19 am

Scintilla wrote:
Bakadeshi [AuN Studios] wrote:Pro is actually quite stable. Not sure about home edition, but Pro is based of NT kernel which is the same reason for win2000's stability.
I always thought that all versions of XP were NT-(and therefore 2000-)based...

Both Win2k, and the XP series are basically the NT 5.0 kernel. Just different interfaces and "features"

DrngdKreationz · Post by **DrngdKreationz** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 6:24 am

Bakadeshi [AuN Studios] wrote:Yea I'm not sure on that. I just don't think so because of how it behaves in comparison to Pro. You may be right, but in anycase it lacks alot of the stability featires Pro has, such as the ability to end a process from the task manager should it stop responding, without having to reboot the entire system.

Sorry about the double post but Are you sure you were looking @ windows 2000. It allows you to end the program and the processes from task manager.

Scintilla · Post by **Scintilla** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 8:28 am

DrngdKreationz wrote:
Bakadeshi [AuN Studios] wrote:Yea I'm not sure on that. I just don't think so because of how it behaves in comparison to Pro. You may be right, but in anycase it lacks alot of the stability featires Pro has, such as the ability to end a process from the task manager should it stop responding, without having to reboot the entire system.
Sorry about the double post but Are you sure you were looking @ windows 2000. It allows you to end the program and the processes from task manager.

Um yeah, I was about to say the same thing... I'm running XP Home, and the Task Manager can be a lifesaver sometimes.