pmistry

Got a dual boot of Win2000 SP2 and Win Millennium, running on Athlon 750 SLOT A, Asus K7V, 512 MB PC133 RAM, GeForce2 MX, blah blah. WinME doesn't seem to perform any better from jumping from 256 MB, but it did when I bumped from 128 to 256. WinME is no different, but I found that Deus Ex, UT, and Quake 3 all load quicker. I suggest you get it anyway cuz when RAM is cheap you gotta swing for it. As for Win2k, the system is more smoother with 512 over 256 especially when loading a memory hog game like UT or Q3 with programs like ICQ open. In most other application use like Office 2000 or Photoshop, no difference from 256 megs, but if you work with larger files, you will get a boost. I think ACPI support is essential and thus you shouldn't bother with it. Just grab the latest SP pack for Win2k, and BIOS update for your motherboard and all will be well, I am sure.

I just installed SP2 for my Win2k machine. [upgraded from SP1] and now my Office 97 installation refuses to run. When I launch PowerPoint or Excel a message pops up saying that this application needs to installed on this machine to work. So I gave up and reinstalled using my 97 Professional disc, and it still doesn't work, yielding the same blasted error. What gives?

all

Can't get Mortal Kombat Trilogy to work under Win2k, don't ask me why I am trying to run it...my bro likes it, but do you think it is possible using the Application Compatibility Kit. Also how about Soldier, if I install it under ME and then run it under Win2k it works fine, but the violence is disabled and I can't get the password to work. If I try to install in Win2k it just won't get past the loading screen and the splash bitmap. I checked the NT Compatible area for both games and Soldier seems to run fine for most people, will try and work through the solutions.

When I use Windows Explorer in Win2000, and when I go to a folder's window and right click and select arange icons by name, Win2k literally sorts them by name including the folders. I prefer how the other Windows like 95/98/NT/and ME all put the folders first by name and then the files, but for me it just mixes the two. Is this a bug? Or is this the way Win2k works? I have SP1 installed as well.

Anybody angry about SP7 for NT 4.0 and the fact that Microsoft cancelled it?

I would like to know how that is done as well. You probably would need to hack the registry, however, you could just have the my documents folder expanded on the start menu, just pull up the taskbar and start menu properties, and check off expand my documents. if my pictures is inside my documents which I am sure it is you can access it off the start menu.

I got a PC running Windows 98 on a 4 GB FAT32 drive. I have a second 20 GB hard drive which I want to install Windows NT4 Workstation on to but I can't get it to work. I don't want a real dual boot, just juggle the hard disks and boot an OS off of it. FDISK won't let me make the second disk active, and thus Winnt 4 won't install. Also my BIOS is old so it won't recognize disks larger than 8.4GB, so I had to use EZ BIOS. My questions are how can I set up this juggling operation for my PC? And will EZ BIOS work with Winnt4?

Every time I start Win2000, the computers scans the floppy drives, I have two 3.5" drives, does anybody know how I may disable this option?

I meant when Windows 2000 logs you on like for me I have it automatically sign me in as Administrator and at this time it searches the floppy disks. I didn't mean when I turn on the computer and it looks for a boot disk. If you did understand what BIOS option is this?

I think WinMe's net code is crap. It won't work at all with my Lucent modem, after 20 seconds of connectivitiy the connection dies. It won't work with a lot of modems and it connected at slower speeds for me, 42000 bps compared to 52000 bps under Win98. The OS crashes far too much on my system and it feels sluggish just navigating the start menu or even using help. The system restore and other PC health options are crap and not used effectively like it is under Windows 2000. All games will support 95/98 until Whistler will come out, so WinME will never pick up speed. 98 is better for everything compared to WinME, and advanced users will use 2000, although I encourage people with good computers to give Win2000 a go.

Yeah I got NFS 2 SE to work under Win2k. THe only thing is that I had it installed in Win98, and then when I booted up Win2k, and double clicked the NFS2SE EXE file, the game ran without a hitch. It even emulated Glide on my GeForce2MX with the help of the MGLIDE wrapper.

I have a very similar system: AMD Athlon 750 MHz Hercules GeForce 2 MX PC133 128 mb ram Sound Blaster Live! Player Maxtor Diamond 20.4 7,200 rpm hdd ABit KA7-100 mainboard Win2k and games run fine, as long as fast writes are disabled in my BIOS. With fast writes enabled the system crashes after playing a game for like 3 minutes. Try up[censored] your motherboard BIOS. But since you've said that you've done everything in the GeForce FAQ I think you may be out of ideas. Have you tried this new AGP VIA fix? http://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWS2000/downloads/recommended/q261606/default.asp

A GeForce and GeForce2 are the fastest and if you can afford them then get it. Voodoo 3 3000 16MBytes AGP [nope] ATI All in wonder 128 32MBytes AGP [if you need the video stuff] Matrox G400 MAX 32Mbytes AGP, [nope] ATI RAGE Fury Pro 32Mbytes AGP, [nope] Savage 4 [forget all S3 video cards] TNT and TNT2 [i think a TNT is a waste of money now, but a TNT2 Ultra is still fast and won't cost too much] It depends on what you want to do, if you just run Windows and Win32 applications like MSOffice then any card is fine, except S3! If you want games then I would work this way Voodoo3 3000 > TNT2 Ultra > GeForce > GeForce2 / Voodoo5 5500 The G400 and Rage 128 are fast under Windows but there gaming performance is kind of poor.

I can't seem to install Win2k Pro on my PC. The setup works fine up until it gets to the "detecting and installing devices screen" here it gets up to about 90% and then the screen goes black and a whole line of commas appear on the screena and the PC won't work forcing me a to do a hard reset. I've left the system for 25 minutes on this screen and nothing happens. I am attempting a clean install. System Spec: ABit KA7-100 [latest BIOS installed] Athlon K7-750 128 MB PC133 Western Digital 4GB Mitsumi CD-RW drive CR-4804-TE Sound Blaster Live! Value Practical Periphereals ISA 33.6 modem ATI Rage 128 video Panasonic S70 Monitor Two 3.5" 1.44MB floppy drives I don't know what the hell is wrong with this installation. The installation was fine on my old P166 MMX, in which the same monitor, hard disk, and modem worked fine so I have eliminated them as the problem. Is there a compatibility issue with the VIA KX133 chipset? Thanks guys!

I did the installation a couple of times and same result. However, I have done some web searching and found some possible causes. The video card and sound card share the same irq. Normally this is ok, but sometimes the video adapter hates sharing, so I am going to try to force the sound card to use another irq. Also the Mitsumi CD-RW drive could be a problem as well, as my motherboard, the CD drive and Win2k, don't like each other [i don't think this is the case, since Win2k was installing fine off of it, and only crashed witht the video flickering, but you never know!]

I did the installation a couple of times and same result. However, I have done some web searching and found some possible causes. The video card and sound card share the same irq. Normally this is ok, but sometimes the video adapter hates sharing, so I am going to try to force the sound card to use another irq. Also the Mitsumi CD-RW drive could be a problem as well, as my motherboard, the CD drive and Win2k, don't like each other [i don't think this is the case, since Win2k was installing fine off of it, and only crashed witht the video flickering, but you never know!]

I currently have Windows 98 installed with no hardware conflicts. But your suggestion is a good one and I will use it if all else fails.

Yeah, ugh, yeah if you some spare equipment lying around give me a call.........ugh, yeah.............

Does anybody have this configuration if so could you tell me if everything is working correctly, because it may be my next system. HOw is video performance, I may switch up to a GeForce too but I heard of problems with it and Athlon Chips? ------------------ Homepage: http://dreamwater.com/icecave

Microsoft has even said themselves that Windows 2000 will support ALL future releases of DirectX so DirectX 8 is in for sure. Windows 2000 is a great gaming platform because of superior file I/O performance, and rock solid stability. I've been testing a lot of games with it. Those games that supported NT4 run without a hitch on Win2k. Some stupid EA games like NFS3 and NFS4 refuse to load because of stupid OS checks, which is just flat out ignorance on EA's part. As for Windows ME, I've been working with a beta copy and I really have to say that this release of Windows will not be much better than Win98 and power gamers will have little reason to upgrade to it. It is VERY unlikely that future games will only support WinME. Even today all games support Windows 95 and Windows 98, there are no Win98 only games. With the large user base that Win95/98 share, game developers cannot just focus on WinME. Furthermore, with Win2k popularity increasing, game developers will make all future games compatible with it, after all EA did make Porsche Unleashed compatible with Win2k. ------------------ Homepage: http://dreamwater.com/icecave