RetouchPRO

Go Back   RetouchPRO > Tools > Software
Register Blogs FAQ Site Nav Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Software Photoshop, Lightroom, Paintshop Pro, Painter, etc., and all their various plugins. Of course, you can also discuss all other programs, as well.

Win2K vs WinXP

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 05-10-2002, 09:27 AM
DJ Dubovsky's Avatar
DJ Dubovsky DJ Dubovsky is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Upper Penninsula of Michigan
Posts: 1,659
You can make XP look like the other Windows versions.
DJ
Reply With Quote top
  #12  
Old 05-10-2002, 09:27 AM
jeaniesa's Avatar
jeaniesa jeaniesa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Colorado foothills
Posts: 1,826
Thanks for the feedback everyone. I also got a few responses on the filmscanners list - including one from a guy who IS running the Scan Elite on XP! Yeah!!

However, there were a couple of people who mentioned like TG that I might want to run a dual boot system. It seems to me that this might be a good "insurance policy". Having never actually done this (and not being clear on how this works - like do I need to load my programs on both partitions - or make them a partition of their own), looks like I'll be researching for a bit longer to figure all of this out.

I hear you, Doug, about the "friendly" features getting in the way. As an old UNIX software developer, I prefer the quick & dirty to the user-friendly approach. I'm hoping that I can turn off some of the "friendly" features, but may just have to live with them.

And, I had forgotten about the MS compatibility checker. I think I'll go check that out now. Someone on the filmscanners list also suggested that I might have problems with my SCSI card if it's too old. Grrrrrr.

Jeanie
Reply With Quote top
  #13  
Old 05-10-2002, 12:13 PM
d_kendal's Avatar
d_kendal d_kendal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 829
Quote:
do I need to load my programs on both partitions - or make them a partition of their own), looks like I'll be researching for a bit longer to figure all of this out.
I could be wrong, but my understanding is that you have to load the programs on each operating system's own partition.
I'd definitely recommend doing a dual boot. right now I'm running a dual boot of WinXP and Linux, and it works great. I use linux for everything except major 3D games and things like Flash that I'm not able to run under Linux yet which I just boot into XP for, and I haven't had any problems running them both on the same computer.

- David
Reply With Quote top
  #14  
Old 05-10-2002, 12:17 PM
DannyRaphael's Avatar
DannyRaphael DannyRaphael is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Seattle, Washington, USA
Posts: 6,300
A W2K fan

Late to the party... have been packing this morning, but needed a (in)sanity break.

I've been running W2K for over a year as a consumer. When I worked at MSFT, I used it for about a year before it was released to the public. Very rock solid OS.

In general W2K, which was in effect Windows NT 5.0 until it was "renamed," was primarily targeted to high-end users vs. traditional desktop users. It's little more spendy because of additional internal functionality, connectivity, security features that I'll never use; uses more more HD and RAM, but worth it in my view for the stability.

Although it's a couple years old, that's not necessarily a bad thing. It means it's more 'mature' and has been more thoroughly debugged. I believe Service Pack 2 was released last summer. W2K is probably more mature from a drivers perspective too.

A close friend of mine who has worked with computers for 25 or so years, recently upgraded from Win98 to XP. He HATES XP because of the intrusiveness that was mentioned previously.

Anyway, good luck no matter what decision you make.

Back to packing!

~DannyR~
Reply With Quote top
  #15  
Old 05-10-2002, 12:47 PM
jeaniesa's Avatar
jeaniesa jeaniesa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Colorado foothills
Posts: 1,826
Doug and/or Danny, Can you give some examples of "intrusiveness"?
Thanks, Jeanie
Reply With Quote top
  #16  
Old 05-10-2002, 12:51 PM
jeaniesa's Avatar
jeaniesa jeaniesa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Colorado foothills
Posts: 1,826
Also, from the MS website, it appears that they still consider Win2K a separate product/stream from WinXP. Does that mean they will be doing updates to both OS's in the years to come - or is XP supposed to "take over" Win2K in the future?
Jeanie
Reply With Quote top
  #17  
Old 05-10-2002, 01:42 PM
chris h's Avatar
chris h chris h is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern UK
Posts: 991
J, I've been running 98 and XP dual boot for the thick end of 6 months now with no trouble. 98 sees all its own drives XP see's everything. I've no real complaints about XP I've tried to crash it many times but its always got back on its feet after a short while.
Reply With Quote top
  #18  
Old 05-10-2002, 06:27 PM
DannyRaphael's Avatar
DannyRaphael DannyRaphael is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Seattle, Washington, USA
Posts: 6,300
In all fairness...

Though I'm very happy with W2K and how Photoshop (and other apps run on it), W2K wasn't really designed with graphics in mind. XP was. W2K takes up a pretty sizeable chuck of RAM to accomodate the extra services it runs, compared to XP.

Another possibility would be to spend the extra $200 you're considering for W2K in additional RAM instead.

FYI: XP came out after I left MSFT, but as I understand it, it uses some of the guts that are in W2K, but is still a distinct architecture. MSFT would love to someday have "one" Windows OS to build/sell/support/debug and that's been a corporate goal for a number of years. Wouldn't be surprised if they achieve it in the next 2-3 years.

W2K has been relatively slow to penetrate the corporate market (slower than MSFT would have liked), but is gaining steam. Since MSFT earns a lot of $$ from corporate accounts, my bet is MSFT support for W2K will be around for a long time.

(Packing almost complete!)
Reply With Quote top
  #19  
Old 05-15-2002, 11:50 PM
jeaniesa's Avatar
jeaniesa jeaniesa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Colorado foothills
Posts: 1,826
In case anyone is just dying to know the outcome of my decision... drum roll please...

I've decided to go with Win2K. My thought process went like this:

1. My film scanner isn't "officially" supported on XP (though I did hear from one person who said it worked for him.) My film scanner does have Win2K drivers.

2. I would have to purchase the newest version of Easy CD Creator/DirectCD (no free upgrade to the XP version.)

3. In all of the people I asked for advice, not one person complained about Win2K, but it was a 50/50 split on recommending/hating XP.

4. Win2K may be "old", but it has stood the test of time very well and I'd rather be able to focus on my work rather than working through the (likely) idiosyncrasies of a new OS.

Unfortunately, the thing I hadn't planned on was my discovery two nights ago that the mainboard in my computer is bad. Specifically, I can't use memory slots 3 & 4. This, of course, explains the "strange behavior" I've been experiencing lately. Since removing the memory cards in those slots, things have seemed a lot more stable - but I know some system files have been corrupted because of errors I'm getting during the boot process. (Once up, I seem to be OK - at least for such things as checking e-mail and surfing the web.)

Since I've got an older system and was hoping to wait another year before upgrading (so that I can spend my money on a printer in July), I had to quickly learn about mainboards and find a replacement. Luckily, my brother is a "guru" at reading technical specs and quickly brought me up to speed. And, I was able to find a suitable board on eBay. Now, I just have to hope that it really works once I install it. If not, I guess I'll be getting a new system (which I have to admit is awfully tempting, given that a "typical" system these days has a CPU twice as fast as mine, memory speeds twice as fast as mine, disk access times twice as fast as mine, etc!)

Sigh...

Jeanie
Reply With Quote top
  #20  
Old 05-16-2002, 12:53 AM
Doug Nelson's Avatar
Doug Nelson Doug Nelson is offline
Janitor
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 7,068
Blog Entries: 21
My only regret after moving to W2K was that I went with the fat32 hd formatting instead of NTFS. Without getting too technical, the NTFS is faster, safer, more secure, and has many other advantages. The only disadvantage is that if you have a lan with Win98 or older computers they won't be able to see the NTFS hd.

You can convert after-the-fact from fat32 to NTFS, but it's not recommended. Now I'd have to reformat my hd and reinstall everything, and it's not that big a regret
Reply With Quote top
Reply

  RetouchPRO > Tools > Software


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Computer restarts in an average day? G. Couch Hardware 80 10-22-2006 11:14 AM
Can't install HPPE3 on Win2k Dennis Kessler Hidden Power Support 3 02-03-2005 09:15 AM
WinXP and Raid 0 and more........ bobkny Software 9 10-22-2003 08:48 AM
help..Epson870 not comp with winXP?? ravenmd Hardware 18 07-28-2002 10:46 PM
WinXP and PS6 paulette conlan Hardware 10 02-06-2002 07:39 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2016 Doug Nelson. All Rights Reserved