Low Caliber Club
Low Caliber Club
    Low Caliber Forum  Hop To Forum Categories  Gaming General    Which is better?
Page 1 2 

Moderators: Manowar, Midknight
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Which is better?
 Login/Join
 
Member
Picture of WoOdY
posted

Question:
which is better for rune and space. windows xp, or windows 2000

Choices:
windows xp
windows 2000

 
 
Posts: 640 | Location: Kentucky | Registered: Mon January 20 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Phil
Picture of Socketboy
posted Hide Post
Win2k rox XP's sox. and stuff.
I don't think i'll ever go there.
There is a similar topic at runegame now too I think.
 
Posts: 2090 | Location: Colorado,USA | Registered: Wed March 19 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Peregrine
Picture of YellowHair
posted Hide Post
XP has good security, but it sucks for gaming and such. More of a professional version then one you'd want to use all the time, can be rather unfriendly...
 
Posts: 448 | Location: Ohio, USA | Registered: Mon July 14 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of WoOdY
posted Hide Post
how much is 2000?
 
Posts: 640 | Location: Kentucky | Registered: Mon January 20 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Phil
Picture of Socketboy
posted Hide Post
I'm not sure about curnet prices. You can always *cough* getitfree *cough* too.
I don't like Xp because it feels too user friendly almost... all kinds of changing things and adding wizards for things that don't need wizards. Plus I don't know about trusting it not to report anything to MS or something. I don't know about it being one big trojan of a OS but I know if I had it I I wouldn't download... things. like umm demos and freeware products. Big Grin Thumbs Up
 
Posts: 2090 | Location: Colorado,USA | Registered: Wed March 19 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Emeritus
Picture of Dante
posted Hide Post
personally i use xp, then do a lot of tweaking of its default services and regedit, etc etc.
i want to try 2k sooner or later.

 
Posts: 1258 | Location: "Auslander" | Registered: Wed May 21 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of ']['|-|E_Szerdi
posted Hide Post
I like XP pro best. Extremely stable and fun to work with (and it runs all four of my servers, my games, trillian, websites, and winamp3 all at once quite well). Plus theres always StyleXP from TGTsoft if you don't like the look. Big Grin

Martini
 
Posts: 247 | Location: MI, USA | Registered: Wed June 18 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Emeritus
Picture of Dante
posted Hide Post
sorry, i mean xp pro.
i guess what i'm doing by this process of tweaking xp pro is to make it more like 2k, really.

(wondering a bit how many people use linux and macs; no flames and proselytising for the moment please)
 
Posts: 1258 | Location: "Auslander" | Registered: Wed May 21 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Peregrine
Picture of Rhoedd
posted Hide Post
XP does suck for gaming, but I promise you that 2000 is even worse. If you're a gamer, you should use 98 Second Edition, unless (like me) your hardware doesn't support it.
 
Posts: 406 | Location: Ohio | Registered: Fri June 27 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of ']['|-|E_Szerdi
posted Hide Post
May i ask why XP sux for gaming? Confused

Martini
 
Posts: 247 | Location: MI, USA | Registered: Wed June 18 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Magistrate
Picture of Manowar
MSN does not support status - click here for the profile.
posted Hide Post
I seem to have less problems with XP Home than the typical joe. I got the sobig worm, but that was it. I'm extremely anal about getting those updates and it's a legal version. (which i think has a lot to do with it...)

To me, my computer is like my car. I don't know a whole hell of a lot about fixing it, but I do know how to maintain it.
 
Posts: 2948 | Location: Michigan, USA | Registered: Fri January 17 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Peregrine
Picture of Misanthrope
posted Hide Post
The problem with XP is the overhead associated with aesthetics and user-friendliness. I run two boxes with Windows 2k and two boxes with Slackware Linux (one is just a firewall/ftp and ex-webserver).
 
Posts: 72 | Location: California | Registered: Tue January 21 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Emeritus
Picture of Dante
posted Hide Post
the recent advent of 64-bit processors makes me wonder if there are any objective comparisons of the various OS's in running applications.
actually, whether multimedia, server functions, etc.
 
Posts: 1258 | Location: "Auslander" | Registered: Wed May 21 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Secretary
Picture of Midknight
posted Hide Post
If you are talking 64-bit processing, use Linux. More flavours of Linux have various versions of itself on different platforms that support 64-bit processing. For all we know Linux has by far surpassed Microsoft. NT intregration into gaming is recent. All rendering and 3d modelling software was designed for NT based operating systems because of the ntfs file system and the fact that NT boxes can handle the work load. Your Windows 98 may seem worthy for a gaming system. But I for one believe that the program runs best on its creator.
 
Posts: 1280 | Location: Edmonton | Registered: Sat January 18 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Phil
Picture of Socketboy
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rhoedd:
XP does suck for gaming, but I promise you that 2000 is even worse.

Hows that? I have been running win 2k since it came out and have not found any problems with it. The ONLY thing I had to do was run vampire the masquerade installation program under compatability mode.
 
Posts: 2090 | Location: Colorado,USA | Registered: Wed March 19 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Magistrate
Picture of Manowar
MSN does not support status - click here for the profile.
posted Hide Post
yeah XP did piss me off once because it wouldn't let me install Leisure Suit Larry... but that game is at least 10 years old, lol.
 
Posts: 2948 | Location: Michigan, USA | Registered: Fri January 17 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of WoOdY
posted Hide Post
oh
is xp home good or bad?
 
Posts: 640 | Location: Kentucky | Registered: Mon January 20 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Peregrine
Picture of Rhoedd
posted Hide Post
Well, I've had many games that will not run on Windows 2000, and several that will not run on Windows XP. I've never had (or heard of) any game that will not run on Windows 98 SE.

One of my biggest problems with Windows XP is that it "holds your hand" much more than Windows 98 SE does. The most obvious instance of this is the way the task manager closes (or rather, doesn't close) programs. In Windows 98 SE, if you tell the damn thing to close, it's going to close. That's it. In Windows XP, you have to wait until the program is good and ready, and often it will lock up your computer (at least, it locks up Yellowhair's computer).

There are only two reasons that I use Windows XP. Firstly, my most recent graphics card is incompatable with Windows 98 SE for some stupid reason which, I'm sure, was thought of by a short Japanese computer programmer. Also, my sound card was not performing correctly on Windows 98 SE. Secondly, Microsoft Notworking is (I begrudgingly admit) a lot better on Windows XP than it is on Windows 98 SE. I mean, you just have to point and click now. Think about it! No longer must we search through ten thousand different options windows to correct our settings. No longer must we be subject to the whims of Microsoft Notworking that determine whether or not we will be able to use our local area notwork - er, network - today. No longer must we sacrifice daily to appease the evil cable demons and the local area network gods! We are free! I shall shut up now.
 
Posts: 406 | Location: Ohio | Registered: Fri June 27 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Secretary
Picture of Midknight
posted Hide Post
Ever hear of NEW COMPUTER SYSTEM is needed to run NEW Operating Systems. Any motherboard printed before January 1999 has major compatibility problems with Windows 2000 and XP because of how the HAL is programmed when you install either of the above OS's. Believe me when I say this because I have had to deal with this bullshit for the past 10 months and many members here can vouch for that. 75 BSOD, 10 RE-Formats. I am able to have my system up and going within 3 hours with everything I had before I restarted the damn machine to format it. Once you have a stable OS like W2K you stick with it. I have gone three weeks without a restart or shut down on my system. Ever try doing that with your system. Microsoft supports its OS's for eight years then junks them. Win 95 has no more support from Microsoft. For my advice, I would get W2K then when there isn't anymore support for it jump to Linux. At least you won't be watched constantly like you are with Win Xp and any newer versions. ** NEWS ** Next Windows OS is going to have serialized hardware and anti-pirating software. Any MP3's you download will also be sent in a packet as soon as the computer touches a network connection or phone line. Privacy is dying with every step we take out of our houses.
 
Posts: 1280 | Location: Edmonton | Registered: Sat January 18 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Peregrine
Picture of Rhoedd
posted Hide Post
My problem isn't that my old computer can't handle my new operating system. The problem is that my new computer couldn't handle my old operating system.

But yes, I agree with you about the privacy.
 
Posts: 406 | Location: Ohio | Registered: Fri June 27 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 

    Low Caliber Forum  Hop To Forum Categories  Gaming General    Which is better?

© Low Caliber Club 2002-4
Gallery | Chat | Archive | Tutorials | Red Carpet

Constitution

Members

Forum

Stats

Wiki