Windows 2k

M

Max Power

Spaceman
When Windows 2000 was released the compatability of all of the WC games were listed (from memory the results weren't great). Can someone fill me in with how things are working these days
 
I really would not recommend W2000 as a gaming platform. There are simply too many incompatibities with older games. Wait for Windows Millineum (though its mainly another upgrade). Until newer games support w2000 out of the box it will be simply too much of a hassle.

------------------
There is no God but myself. No destiny but what I deem for me. I walk my path and no others, for I am free.
 
Windows 2000 is simply the newest release of Windows NT... as thus, very few games are (or ever will be) supported -- don't look to play Wing Commander under 2000 ever...
 
What is Linux steam?
confused.gif

Do give me a reply before my funeral!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
2000 definitely is bad for older games like WC. I have heard newer games, specifically designed with 2000 in mind run very well, because they aren't handicapped by the limitations of DOS which still haunts Windows 9x. NT (both 4.0 and Windows 2000) is quite a bit more stable and secure than 9x, and once I got my office off of 95 and running strictly NT, my life became much easier. Part of the reason I am able to spend so much time here
smile.gif


If you are interested in gaming though, for the moment 9x is the way to go, especially if you want to play games that are several years old. I love the stabilty of NT, but I have 98 at home because I like to play games. You could always dual boot...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don`t think Windows Millineum would be much good either, if you plan on playing older games. If I`m not mistaken it`s DOS emulator is the same as win2000. The major difference between the 2 is that it`s more multimedia friendly than Win2000.
I did hear a rumor, though, that it loads up in 9 seconds no matter what computer you have, but that remains to be seen.
 
WinME is essentially the newest version of Win9X... as thus, it is still based on the original DOS -- although word has it that Microsoft has taken steps to cover up the users ability to access the simple DOS prompt, it will undoubtably be fairlly easy to do this...
 
I don't think Win Me still has the Reboot to DOS option in the shutdown menu, or the DOS boot option in the F8 menu. Bootdisks should still work though.
 
IIRC, Win ME was supposed to be based on a new platform, not DOS. BTW, you can use boot disks on Win NT too, if the file system is FAT16.
 
Windows is Win98SE part 2, the patch continues. It has a reworked interface (so i looks like Win2000), and far superior home networking support but does not run in any way better or differently than before. It also is easier to recover from changes programs might make to the whole OS. But dont expect anything special or much better, it is still just a reworked version of the Win95 kernel.

------------------
There is no God but myself. No destiny but what I deem for me. I walk my path and no others, for I am free.
 
I have yet to see it proven, but the 9 second load times are said to be completely true. It's still based on the Win95 kernal, but it's been shaved millions of lines of code. (Hopefully), no more bloated OS.

------------------
Member of the LMG and hating it (Disgruntled Man)
Real heros wear SCBAs, not capes.--Me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Every beta test shows Win ME running at roughly the same speed and performance. Nothing big on that front at all. DirectX 8 will bring some nice improvement thouhg

------------------
There is no God but myself. No destiny but what I deem for me. I walk my path and no others, for I am free.
 
The 9 second boot time thing is only on high end machines (like a 900mhz Athlon) which only have WinME installed fresh and nothing else. On an average machine you can still get boot times of less than 30 seconds though.
 
Speaking of high end machines, a 1Ghz Thunderbird, hit a bookMark score of 538.5. A DUAL 1Ghz Pentium III, hit 500 even. DUAL gigahertz processors couldn't beat a single AMD Thunderbird in a highly, highly simple test. But it beat it in SysMark, with the Intel coming in at 239, and the AMD at 191. Oh, and a clean Ghz Thunderbird boots in 65 seconds with Win98.

------------------
Member of the LMG and hating it (Disgruntled Man)
Real heros wear SCBAs, not capes.--Me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top