Brian Frank

A big problem with Linux is the massive number of individual distributions out there. Add to this the fact that you can make your own if you feel lucky, and you have an OS "running around like a chicken with its head cut off". There are more distributions than versions of Windows. Another potential nail in the Linux coffin is the current development of the Darwin kernel for Mac OS X. Apple has embraced Open Source and the Darwin kernel can be run on x86. It's in development right now, but you can download it and (try to) run it on your PC. Like Linux or BSD. Darwin is supposed to be pretty close to FreeBSD. I'm no prophet, but I'd say Apple has a better shot getting a wide spread adoption than Linux. Red Hat, Mandrake, Storm, SuSe, LOAF, Turbo, Corel, Caldera, and just Linux itself are available. Seeing as Apple is pretty big into USB and Firewire, it's not going to take forever to add support for new hardware to Mac OS X. I used to think Linux was pretty cool and all that, but there's just too much going against it to really be a viable option. I do not see Linux becoming a real desktop alternative to Windows unless there are some major changes. It's not user friendly, and I don't think many people are thrilled with spending more time, sanity, and obscene phrases getting something to work under Linux. Windows causes headaches, no question, but Linux just adds to the frustration. If Microsoft wants to believe Linux is a real threat, fine. Microsoft isn't paying attention to the real enemy to Gates uber-geek throne. With Apple joining Open Source, I believe we are looking at the beginning of a very viable alternative to Windows.

Not me. No onboard sound on either system. Never done this before either. I know a way that will most likely fix it, but I'm not that desperate at the moment. More annoyed than anything else.

On the other hand, RAID 0,1, & 5 are the most widely used forms. Other flavors are there, but just not used as much. RAID 5 is probably your best bet for speed and security. However, since SCSI RAID is generally targeted at servers, you could be forking over a large wad of cash if you want more than RAID 0 and 1 capabilities. I looked at price watch, and you are looking at some big bucks, sir. I'm not discouraging hardware RAID at all, but if you're concerned about getting extra speed and reliability it's going to be expensive. If it was IDE RAID, it would still cost a few hundred bucks for a good hardware RAID card, but you wouldn't be looking at over $1000 for your wants. Considering this is a home system, I'd really advise you to skip it all together. Software RAID isn't your best bet for striping, and hardware RAID for SCSI is probably more than you'd want to spend. If you do find a SCSI RAID card for a reasonable price, and by that I mean below $500, go for it, especially if it's new. That's my view on it. I'm not a SCSI or RAID expert, but SCSI RAID is one phrase that is not described as 'cheap', at least from my quick look over at Pricewatch.

Well, for Windows it's nice, since you don't have to stick the CD in everytime you install hardware. It's there to save face if the working copy gets screwed up. While you could delete those files, it's best to leave them there. This is a good thing from Microsoft for once. If you're low on space, buy a bigger hard drive. I don't mean to be a wuss, but if you have to hack the registry and other files to change something, it's probably a good sign you're not supposed to change it. I don't see it being ultimately worthwile in the end, and I'd assume that the veterans would agree. There's lots of stuff MS does that is annoying, including this thing, but it makes sense in this case.

For what I need, EZ CD Kreator works fine. Nero had a bit complex interface for me, and was frustrating to work with. I do data backups and the occasional muzak CD, so I can't really say anything about the BIN files. ISO's aren't a problem at all.

Unless a BIOS revision has it, a voltage mod is the only way. At that point, something like Vapochill or a water cooling setup would be required; even the Swiftech MCA 462 with the mighty Delta wouldn't do it. If you have the skillz, time, money, and balls to do it, be my guest. I do overclock, but aside from the "pencil trick" and changing the fan on my MX, I'm not going to go to great lengths to overclock. Also, having a particular stepping will play a major role in that. Get the right chip, and that 2.10 voltage might not be necessary.

Well...you could always go into the woods and, uh, *mark you territory* if ya know what I mean. Nothing dangerous in the urinals that you know of, right? Ooooh. I just thought of something: I'm currently working as a custodian, and clean a number of toilets. I hope I'm off the 28th!

Wow! that's pretty good, 'specially considering it's a PCI card. What resolution you usin', Pimpin? I've been able to hit 5600+ with the I.S.D., but for some reason I've been getting in the low 5000's. Haven't a clue why it did that all of a sudden. Resolution in benchmark: 1024x768 in 16-bit in 3dmark2k. Same settings in 3dmark2001 were getting 3000+ no sweat. 21.80's used. I will have the GF2 Pro soon. *drool*

If you count my dad's laptop, 7 are at home, six if not (nearly fooled ya, there:p). Of course, mine are the fastest overall, only loosing out with 5400RPM drives to 7200RPM ones.

Lovely. I've been getting that error message too. Happens when running a media file or opening IE. Does it randomly too. If anybody has a solution... It happens just often enough to be annoying. The address isn't the same as mine, and some of the codes beside the KMODE one are different, but the Date Stamp and wdmaud.sys are there.

One note: you don't need to download any bootloader to get this to work. You can just boot off the Win2k CD, and choose the repair option. You don't need to have an ERD either, just choose the options that don't require you to insert a disk, and use the 'Fast' repair. Reboot once its all done, and you have the bootloader. If you don't like the settings, you can right click my computer, go to properties>advanced>startup and recovery for the options to change the time out and default OS. Everything else is good to go, BTW. Just letting you know of a built in option. Got the info out of a MS Res. Kit book.

Have no clue. Just letting you know someone saw your post.

Quote: Subject: JDulmage Classification: wanker Status: Missing In Action hehehehe I kind miss the retard. He's dead. In my closet.

I don't know what it is with ATI but it has some problems running Unreal or UT. At 1152x856, I damn well better see a noticable difference, and I didn't. My friend can't either, and he's running 98. I don't know what's up with ATI, but that is a real turn off when that card should be walking all over the V4/V3 (its the same thing really, one just has 32MB and 32-bit color). At the time ATI's Win2k drivers were pretty poor, but that was just horrible performance. I had my 800MHz Duron running at 800MHz then, and that is certainly enough to power any game out on the market today. While I was playing in 16-bit with both cards which isn't the strong point for Radeons, there's no excuse for that poor of performance. If it wasn't for that little problem, the Radeon would be great! Edit 1.3GB of RAM, odd combo there;)

I haven't seen the Radeon work reliably or as good as people claim. I had the chance to try out the Radeon 32MB DDR--and I'm serious when I'm saying I couldn't tell a difference between that and the Voodoo 4 4500 AGP I had in there before. In 3dmark, yeah I could, but not in game play. Please humor me as to why I would want to spend the $200 that the card cost at the time? I promptly made up my mind to get a GeForce 2MX from Hercules--which is a great card. My friend who I was borrowing it from got a new mobo and CPU, and the card performed like crap in his system. He replaced it, and it still performs like crap. He is going to get a new motherboard to see if things change, and if not, he's looking at a Kyro II. If I wasn't primarily concerned with gaming, and ATI cards didn't suck under the Unreal engine, I'd be okay with them. If I was into 2D quality, I'd buy Matrox first. For me, the GeForce 2 MX is clear enough for what I do. ATI can crow all they want about superior performance, but I'd better be able to tell in actual use from a card that is clearly from an older generation.

Ya. Spes help. I've found the 10.80's to work very well. I've only recently gone to a different version, 21.80, which is also pretty good under 2k. IRQ sharing is rarely the problem, so ignore it as a problem unless you run out of other options. The only time I'd start to try to change the IRQs would be a last ditch effort before doing a clean install. You'll have to change to a non-ACPI PC configuration first, and pray to the tech gods that you can boot into Win2k with a functional keyboard and/or mouse. The last ditch effort would be going into safe mode if this happens. If it doesn't, I hope you've backed up your stuff, because you are looking at a reinstall of Windows--speaking from my misfortune, here.

If I knew, I'd send you the info. I definitely wouldn't post it on any board for a variety of reasons I'm to lazy to mention. In the mean time, I suggest swearing and making obscene gestures at your screen and/or the general direction of Redmond.

I've heard about 21.85's...

Hmm...with the GF256 in there, that 250 watter is probably around it's maximum capacity. SCSI, Athlon...that's pushing your luck, there. If you add another drive, go to at least a 300 watt PSU. Actually, it would hurt to go beyond that, but I'd get a bigger power supply before upgrading anything else.

Of course, if they're DOS games, that could be more of a problem. If the troubled ones are courtesy of EA, it would explain a lot, considering EA's poor support for 2k users. There will be some games that just are not going to work at all regardless of what you do. That's the point where you should see how much it's worth to play again. Microsoft has done a good job of turning 2k into a good gaming platform, and I would assume that they would do what they can for XP.

I've run NTFS and FAT32 on Win2k and XP and can't tell a difference. NTFS handles large drives better than FAT32. If you aren't going to partition your hard drive, you'll want to use NTFS for 40GB and above. I wouldn't recommend NTFS if you've got a 5GB drive for everything, due to the Master File Table fondness of space. What you've heard is true, but to a point. FAT32 has a limit on the size it can handle, and that's the point where you need to use NTFS. I'm not sure if it applies, but formatting a drive with Win2k limits the size to 32GB using FAT32. I'm going to make the assumption that XP would be limited in this way too. NTFS does have security measures built to impose limits on access to files for certain users. Overall NTFS is the better way to go. Small drives or partitions are probably best formatted as FAT32. If you are doing a dual boot with Win9x, FAT32 is the way to go for simplicity, and that 9x and 3.1 and earlier can't read or write NTFS.

Well some games probably won't run if they rely on 9x-specific files to work. You are going to find that some games aren't worth it to get running when you make the jump to Win2k or XP. Try running the games with the Application Compatibility program. I believe it's somewhere in the Programs section of the start menu. Which games can't you get to work?

Hmm... Well, they're comparing it to the i810, so considering the target, those APIs are probably second thought. I remember reading some benchmarks between the value chipsets from Intel, Via, SiS, and possibly ALi. SiS had the best DVD playback. I'd guess that gaming isn't going to be very good at all. It's integrated video, which, as a rule, sucks. The best so far is the NForce integrated video, but even that isn't breathtaking. I don't know if it doesn't support OpenGL or D3D, although if it does, it wouldn't be earthshattering.

Might wanna try here. It lists them by model number and has some info on upcoming driver support additions. Beta drivers, BTW.

Yeah, that would help too...blue end to the motherboard.