hahaha s.hitey windows2000 - no more slow games 4 me

[DavidNewbould 0]

lol i feel for all you people still stuck on windows 2000, at the weekend i finally decided i had had enough and formatted my Hard Drive.

Installed win98SE and WOAH what a difference.

Games ran faster, windows ran faster, no caching problems, no more physical memory dumps, ahh life is good now...

I advise everyone of you to go back to win98 cos lets face it, you only want win2k is so mummy and daddy cant get in and find your [censored].

[Goronok 0]

Dont call me when you blue screen and all your crap is gone!

[Shrink 0]

"I advise everyone of you to go back to win98 cos lets face it, you only want win2k is so mummy and daddy cant get in and find your [censored]."

 

Holy crap - that tells us something about you doesn't it? LOL

 

1. Your surfing habits

2. Your inability to install and configure windows.

 

Maybe if you're nice, Mommy or Daddy will show you how to run Windows 2000.

 

 

 

------------------

Shrink

 

92% of the things we worry about don't happen - but the other 8% DO!

 

PIII 650@850

BE6-II Mobo with 192 mb ram

20 gig Quantum KX 8 gig Quantum CR

SBlive Value

Voodooo3 3000 AGP

... and a bunch of USB Stuff

Windows 2000 Pro Retail

[MoreLight 0]

ROFL

 

You had been asking some reasonably intelligent questions recently, and people had been trying to answer them.

 

Now it looks like you just went and had a major brain fart over there.

 

Lost another one to the mundane world of Win9X.

 

You win some, you lose some.

 

PS: You can't hide [censored] or anything else from someone who knows how to look for it smart guy, even in NTFS. Not unless you know how to encrypt it, and you just lost that ability by moving to Win9X. Better be careful out there.

[DavidNewbould 0]

hmm interesting opinions, how u assume that because i am running windows 98, i therefore know nothing about computers.

When, perhaps, you may want to think that i primarily use my computer for playing games, and the sensible option would be to use windows98 as IT IS FASTER for games on MY SYSTEM.

And WTF is up with my apparent "inability to install and configure windows" ????

Where the hell are you getting that from ???

Weird...

[Four and Twenty 0]

imho putting windows 98 on a coputer is kinda like infecting it with the worst virus you could find. Give it some time and the BSODs will surley start happening in windows 98.

 

------------------

My System

Dell Demension XPS T500

Dual Boot

Windows 2000 Pro 2195

Windows Millennium Final

PIII @ 500 Mhz (with after market heatsink and dual fan)

256 Megs Ram

TNT2 Ultra Graphics Card

Matrox Millennium PCI (for second monitor)

3Com 10/100 Ethernet Card

3Com 56k Modem

12.6 Gig IBM HD

40X CD Rom Drive

100 Mb Zip Drive

MS Optical Mouse

[jdulmage 0]

YES!! Finally!! Your stupid enough to make a mistake that I made back in March, now i'm flaming you..

 

 

Windows 98 is the biggest piece of crap in the world, It crashes way too much, I mean, when you first install 98 First Edition, there were like 30 MB of patches to download, not to mention that I would download latest WMP, DirectX and IE which is another 30 MB. Etc, etc. Your games may run faster in Windows 98, but let me put money on that, because I bet that if I came over to your place, installed Windows 2000 fresh, I could get those games to work faster, you just have to know how to configure it to those specific needs. HAHA, I loved this flame, i'm glad I got the chance, it was worth it!

 

 

 

 

------------------

Whistler is or will be better than Windows 2000, if you don't think so, get a reality check and hope it doesn't bounce.

[INFERNO2000 0]

I'll practice my Bob and Tom ebonics.

 

Man, F*ck You!

 

translated: Win98? You moron!

 

Win98 is for mommy and daddy, because they are afraid of their computer.

 

As for [censored]...it's easy enough to find no matter what(c:\Steve\Cardinal\flight logs\miss_felatio.jpg)...especially when you're installing Napster or Scour(found my dad's secret stash!)....and besides..why download it anyway and risk it? It's easier to just go online to a good spot and get updated ones anyway. Not that I do...just that I knew and used the tricks years ago.

 

I formatted my harddrive and went to Win98 the other day. within 6 hours, my Explorer.exe got corrupted by a download from MS, and had to reformat. My win2k has been up and running flawlessly(on intel systems) from day one of getting the OS(Athlon excluded....stupid VIA Win2k Nvidia thing).

 

But hey. you may use your outdated OS....your inferior memory management. hell. even jump to ME if you want. We'll not hate you for your decision. Just the fact that you are an idiot(and if anyone knows an idiot, it's me).

 

 

And...my Athlon 750 booting into WinME takes 5 seconds longer than my PIII 800eb instaling Win2k. Me is supposed to be the fast OS too.

 

Oh...just for ****s and giggles..when this was dualbooted, my 3dmark scores were better in Win2k

[ThC 129 0]

Yeah, if the 9x line was so good they wouldve scrapped NT and used 9x for whistler and blackcomb. My games run at the same speed in whistler as they do in 9x, i also dont have to put up with putting my computer on suspend then waking it to find it wont and having to reboot it. As for [censored] yeah I love my [censored] if it wasnt for [censored] i wouldnt have a net connection. Nothing like well i cant get into it here some youngens arent ready for those kind of details. Why download picks when you can get full movies. Ive been running a 2k based kernal for over a year now and love it NTFS file system, services, 32-bit OS pure, no DOS, BSOwhat I dont even know what those are. Memory dumbs what are you talking about I havent had one memory dump yet, you must not know much about computers because if your W2K install gives you that many problems its time to throw the commadore 64 out man. Or if you took the time to look for drivers and get reports on how your HW works (DAMN I CANT USE MY GAYOL CONNECTION NOW, all my spam is gone), so go back to GayOL and WinPOS or at least go hang out in #gay. Lets all give him a pity party because he cant get w2k running right.

 

AWWWWW AWWWWWW AWWWWWW AWWWW

[tristan777 0]

hrmmm... i have been running an AMD chip since i have been running win2k, and i never had to reformat because of windows. i have a tnt2u as well. only time i reformatted was to dual boot 98 and 2k. i needed 98 for my emulators. i switched from a k6 to a t-bird last week, and i didnt have to format for 2000. but my 98 partition is screwed up to no end.

[jdulmage 0]

tristan..

 

and yet, if you mean emulators like ZSNES and stuff, ZSNES is going Windows style anyways, lol...you won't need 98. Plus when Whistler is around, you won't need 98 anymore either because of the added support that it'll have. Goodbye 9x!!

 

 

 

 

------------------

Whistler is or will be better than Windows 2000, if you don't think so, get a reality check and hope it doesn't bounce.

[celeron550 0]

being a 'newbie' with win2k,i too at first,was skeptical towards it,and had a few teething problems(which were quickly remedied by members of this forum )...my biggest moan with win2k is its size, i mean a gig basic install really lives up to the term 'bloatware'...but i have grown to love the stability of win2k.geez,with win98 and constant bsod's and reinstalling continously really became a drag,no such problemo's with win2k,hell,the worst error ive got so far was win2k telling me to go run a certain game(sega rally 2) on win 9x!!!..i too like to play games occassionally so thats why i dual boot,which is a better solution than ragging on win 2k,but ive found i spend more and more time with win2k than 98 because of its stability,faster net performance etc etc...besides,20+gig hdd's are so common,dual booting is barely a concern...

as for games,well,i have to disagree with you on speed..quake 3 runs just as fast on my win2k as 98,if not fractionally faster,as someone previously said,if u can set it up properly win 2k,games wise,performs admirally...

 

just my .02cents...

[BladeRunner 0]

Oh I love it when people decide to start a thread like this.

The insecure computer users who still wish they could run all their games under DOS and run their word processor under Win 3.1.

The thing is, when I usually hear this it's either from some 25 year old anti-Microsoft dude or from somebody my parents age.

Games are no slower in Win2k than they are in Win9x as long as the manufacturer of your hardware has produced good drivers.

No if's, no but's......I said NO IF'S!!

I look forward to seeing your posts in the future along the lines of 'I moved my mouse and then got an invalid page fault in explorer.exe' then we'll giggle.

 

Win2000 is no safer at hiding your [censored] (not that I have to, parents don't use computers and other half is cool ) unless you encrypt your data.

Best not let mummy & daddy use your computer eh?

 

------------------

PIII 700E, Intel D815EEA, 512MB PC100 RAM (Hyundai), Matrox G400MAX, SB Live! Value, Intel 10/100 NIC, Adaptec 2940UW, IBM 7200 ATA100 30GB HD, IBM 7200 ATA66 20GB HD, Pioneer 32x/6x SCSI DVD, Yamaha 4416 SCSI CD-RW, Iomega Zip 100 SCSI Internal, Iiyama Vision Master Pro 410.

Windows 2000 Only

[Bursar 0]

Quote:

Win2000 is no safer at hiding your [censored] (not that I have to, parents don't use computers and other half is cool ) unless you encrypt your data.

When did you get an other half???

[Damien 0]

I have to agree that putting Windows 98 back onto you're machine is a very silly thing to do. For a start Windows 2000 and the NT kernal will soon replace all previous Win9X verisons - including ME. So you're going to have to upgrade all over again at some point.

 

I find Windows 2000 just as fast as Win 98 - faster in some operations. It's also far more stable - I used a 98 machine recently and couldn't believe how flakey it was.

 

Well there we go. I suppose some people are just looking for continual punishment - good luck - you'll need it!!

 

 

[This message has been edited by Damien (edited 03 October 2000).]

[Gambler FEX online 0]

DavidNewbould really ticked you guys off hehe but he is right you know most games-sites do still recommend windows 98se (not winME) for gaming. firingsquad is one, I belive I saw it over at anandtech and sharkyextreme too,.

 

The also mentioned win2k/whistler is the future, and for those of you who can, get a copy of win2k and dual boot and make sure the hardware and software developers know if there is any problems. We must get ready for Whistler, it is due next summer!

 

WinME have problems with liveware and SB Lives (haha) so it is not yet suitible for gaiming, myself have tested it and it is no good I will install win98se again for dvds and Rollcage 2. DVDs skip and rollcage 2 drop samples all because of bad drivers from Creative Labs.

 

Tanks for letting me rant I loved you pity party THC really made me laugh

[nagual 0]

we already rated firingsquads tech-knowledge..they got a 1/10 rating

 

in q3 (win2k)i get 178 fps in timedemo demo001 ; i get 160 with win98se ..

z00000000 wazzaaaaaaabi?

[Ronin 0]

OMG!!!

 

Now I get to flame someone without getting in trouble.

 

W9X is the biggest piece of S*hit to ever be released, 95 was better. The reason to run W2K is stability. And if you don't see that then you need to be banned from this message board. I have had the best luck out of everyone with W2K just ask everyone who has a SB Live card, I'm the only one who has a working sound card under W2K...lol

 

Anyways, if you went back to W9X then you just don't know what the f*uck you are doing.

 

...

 

------------------

My Windows 2000 System:

 

Dual Intel 850's

Tyan Thunder 2400 MB

Onboard Intel 82559 NIC

512 Megs Ram

Adaptec 39160 Ultra 160

1 - 18 Gig Cheetah - U160

2 - 18 Gig Cheetah U2W

1 - Maxtor 60 Gig (IDE)

SB Live Platinum

Plextor 12/4/32 - Burner

Plextor 40x UW CD-Rom

10x Sony DVD Drive

Hercules Geforce 2 64meg

Dual V2 Cards, for D2

Viewsonic PF815 22" Monitor

...

My Win ME System:

 

PIII 733

Asus P3C4X MB

256 Megs PC133 Mem

Adaptec U2W Scsi Card

1 - 9 Gig Cheetah 10K

48x IDE CD-Rom

CL Geforce DDR

ESS 1371 Sound Card

[antareus 0]

Who cares about the opinions of this guy?

 

1) He comes in and posts a topic like this, obviously to get attention

2) He's a member of clan BFG, and his name is something like DeStRoYer, sounds like a kewl d00d to me

3) He can't spell the s-word correctly

4) The overwhelming amount of factual evidence he provides for why Win9x is far superior to Win2k [/sarcasm]

 

Take your juvenile flames elsewhere, we don't care what OS you use or why you switched.

 

So now that you switched, does this mean you'll leave us alone?

[INFERNO2000 0]

My SB LIVE has always worked

 

it was the nvidia and via chipset that didn't

 

And that was remedied by going back to Intel

 

 

Hey..can we move this to the "OTHER" forum with other rants and flames and general idiocy?

 

 

And remember!! We can't keep this going. We must keep JDULMAGE's post going

[Cheese Weasel 0]

I agree with everyone else that going back to Windows 98 is a step in the wrong direction once you've used Windows 2000, but I disagree with your reasons why. Everyone's saying how unstable it is, how it BSOD's all the time, etc. etc, which is all true, to a point. Unfortunately, even a lot of experienced users still don't understand Win98's care and feeding, which I believe is the main reason for it's bad reputation. Lots of people still don't know the proper way to uninstall programs, update drivers, Scandisk and Defrag regularly, etc., which is pretty sad, really. The PC I'm using to type this is running Win98SE (sorry) that I installed sometime in January. It's survived three video card upgrades (along with numerous driver updates for the latest, a GeForce DDR), two network cards, two sound cards, two IDE controllers, and a few rounds of musical CD-ROM/CD-RW/DVD-ROM and their required software. Add lots of installed and uninstalled games and the like, and you have the recipe for BSOD hell, right? Wrong. Win98SE has been fine for the most part. Not trouble free, of course, but nothing out of the ordinary, and certainly not what some people claim like BSOD's and lockups every time they turn it on, and I'm on this thing for a few hours every day.

Now don't get me wrong here. I'm lucky enough to have three PC's, and my dual rig is running Windows 2000. Nothing beats Win2k for what it's designed for. It's solid and it's stable. But give Win98 a break. For surfing the web and playing games, it works fine. More often than not, it's the user who screws it up.

[INFERNO2000 0]

I can agree with that.

But whenever I leave my computer alone for a minute, it BSODS on me.

 

Of course, that's because I've got a BSOD screensaver, so that doesn't count

 

 

Seriously though...if you're afraid of your computer, or the thought of researching and any other daunting studying tasks bothers you, you're probably better off with Win98. My parents are, because they want their computer to be left alone(Brandon, stop touching that thing!). Their P100 Packard Bell ran Win95 without format for 4 years..until I decided over the summer that it needed to be redone, because it was slow, bloated, and filled with partial files that were not uninstalled properly.

 

 

Windows 2000 is overkill for them...and it may be overkill for this a$$hole as well. But just because he has a $hitty setup, doesn't mean that bashing the competent Win2k users is necessary.

So he has a POS computer that he wants to run a POS OS on. fine! WE all know how many Mac users there are out there that don't understand that computers are machines. Not (eye) candy.

 

They're supposed to look mean and menacing, and scary...This is what a computer is SUPPOSED to look like: http://www.hardocp.com/stuff/qcon2kcases/pic10.html

 

Not some purple thing shaped like a monitor with no floppy drive(I hate them, but I don't want an external one).

 

Compaq and HP and all the other translucent computer makers have it all wrong...or maybe they don't.

 

 

The kind of person that would use and need Win2k would rather have the [H]ARD computer than something that looks purty over by the desk, am I right? The kind of person that wants 98(Or, God help us, ME(the os, not the person))...is also the kind of person that goes out to BestBuy(my mall ) and gets one of them thair newfangled HPs or Compaqs( the ones that have the quick removeable CD Drives that to reinstall everything requires voiding the warranty ).

 

Or, they are a diehard DOS gamer, or are victim to some really stupid companies not seeing the light.

 

Somehow, I get the feeling that this *****************ing **************** is one of the former.

 

Dual boot if necessary..but no one should do less than that.

 

Oh well. My rant is over.

[toonzwile 0]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ronin:
I have had the best luck out of everyone with W2K just ask everyone who has a SB Live card, I'm the only one who has a working sound card under W2K...lol

Not really... I havent had a single problem with my SB Live since i first installed Win2k over 4 months ago. I have an original SB Live (before the Plat, MP3, or XGamer), have the latest Liveware, and no problems whatsoever... sound is crisp, f***ing badass, I love my sound card. So i guess im the luckiest of the SB Live guys

[DavidNewbould 0]

hmm you all seem to think win2k is gods gift to computer users.

as some dumbass mentioned, yes i AM in a clan - [bFG]. Im also in [OTT], why? no, not because im a "cool d00d", but because i enjoy playing games.

yes thats right games.

You may not of heard of them because of win2k's s.hitey "lets-run-4000-things-at-once-so-it-doesnt-crash" theory.

When my PC booted win2k, it would take bloody ages to load in even the desktop.

And for the last time dont go on about me knowing nothing because its getting old.

 

"win98 is for mummys and daddys who are scared of pc's"

an interesting thought yet again, especially since you all seem to think that win2k is SUPER STABLE and win98 gives BSOD's all the time. So wouldnt it make sense to stick to the "more stable" OS ?

Yes it would.

 

and i also used to twin-boot but because win2k took up half my hard drive for JUST to OS, i scrapped it and went to winME. I found this to be pretty ****, so i formatted and went to win2k only. Big mistake. After only 3 days, i formatted again and posted this thread.

 

Win98 has never crashed on me since i formatted, and as long as someone who doesnt know much about pc's doesnt **** AROUND with it, its fine.

 

I have win98 tweaked so my internet connection rocks on my 56K modem, games fly, it NEVER crashes, and most importantly, IT BOOTS QUICKLY.

 

Win2k may be fast for people with half a terrabyte of RAM, and an PIII 1.04Ghz, but for the average joe, win98 kicks ass.

 

WE ALL LOVE SUPER FAST WIN98

WE ALL LOVE SUPER FAST WIN98

WE ALL LOVE SUPER FAST WIN98

WE ALL LOVE SUPER FAST WIN98

WE ALL LOVE SUPER FAST WIN98

WE ALL LOVE SUPER FAST WIN98

WE ALL LOVE SUPER FAST WIN98

[DrSchmoe 0]

Everyone has opinions, and it is indeed possible to have the wrong opinion.

 

If Win2k isn't running well, either you have less than 128MB ram, an old BIOS, or old/non-supported hardware. The system requirements are steep but new OSes tend to push the limits. Try running Windows 95 on a 486 with 4MB of RAM and you will see what I mean.

 

I can understand that someone might prefer Win98 (cost, not enough storage/memory, etc), but saying "windows [98] ran faster, no caching problems, no more physical memory dumps" is almost perverse.

 

But that isn't what interested me the most...

 

Quote:

Originally posted by BladeRunner:

Win2000 is no safer at hiding your [censored] (not that I have to, parents don't use computers and other half is cool ) unless you encrypt your data.

Best not let mummy & daddy use your computer eh?

 

Someone else pointed this part out before...

 

So fill me in on this arrangement. Your other half lets you keep [censored]? Is this also her computer? Does she keep *her* [censored] on it?

 

Interesting... I guess I have a tendency for finding more conservative relationships.

 

[This message has been edited by DrSchmoe (edited 03 October 2000).]