PDA

View Full Version : Windows 2000


n_ick2000
22nd July 2001, 05:22
I can't believe it. Starting up windows 2000 literaly takes 20 minutes. And I installed service pack 2 and the icons are all in low color. Even windows me is better. It shouldn't take that long to start up becasue I have a 650 athlon and 128 mb ram.

sgtfuzzbubble011
22nd July 2001, 06:11
Upgrade to Windows 98 SE. :)

nateJC
23rd July 2001, 21:35
Technically wouldn't that be a downgrade? Of course, 98SE is better than 2K so then it would be an upgrade, which would cancel out the downgrade making it a sidegrade (sideways-grade) perhaps? I dunno, I'm too confused by Sarge's upside-down title.

/me goes off and broods because mods get HTML in their titles and Major Dudes don't.

asshole
24th July 2001, 06:20
Of course WinME has the best boot up time. It's the best feature of ME.
As for your Win2k taking literally 20 min, there's a problem. That problem can either be you or your computer. I doubt it's the computer's fault since machines can only do the instructions that they're given.

My PII 400 with 128MB RAM takes less about a min to start Win2k. WinME takes about 20 secs.

n_ick2000
24th July 2001, 21:52
On my other computer, I have Windows XP rc1 (a beta build) and it boots up a lot faster than windows me. Like 15 seconds after I turn it on I will already be logged in. (that computer is a amd k6-2 500 with 256 mb of ram.) As far as my windows 2000 computer, it's dual booted win98 and win2000 so I ditched windows 2000.

Bilbo Baggins
24th July 2001, 23:30
I have windows 1 on my computer, and it takes 45 days to load.

I also have win2k on my other computer, but that is coming off,and win98se is going back on.

Nofx Guy
31st July 2001, 06:41
my friend has a comp with win2k and win 98se and they both take about 15 seconds to boot up, but i guess that is his thunderbird 1.2 overclocked to 1400 with 720 mb's of ram.


my bro used to have win2k on his 840 t-bird with 192mb of ram and it would take about 25 sec to boot up, personaly i like win2k, it's nice, stable, and i dunno nice?

Bilbo Baggins
31st July 2001, 09:28
Right, win2k is now going back on, and 98 is coming off, pile of wank that it is >(

Aeroe
1st August 2001, 03:43
yeah but with 9x you crash about 30 times more.
so since you enjoy that winme logo so much, it doesn't matter, right?

Twilightseer
1st August 2001, 08:22
Windows ME is the crappiest OS I've ever used.
I now use Win 2000 and it rocks :)

Nofx Guy
1st August 2001, 15:14
win xp is gunna suck major ass! i'm stickin to win2k and 98se, also linux.

win xp looks all bright and colorful, well mabey kids will ike that but not the average day user

Aeroe
1st August 2001, 23:54
XP is skinable (themes), it can look like anytang :)
even win2k:
http://aeroe.homestead.com/files/xp_classic.JPG

Twilightseer
2nd August 2001, 07:31
Skinnability is not exactly a good criterium to choose an OS, imho.

ElChevelle
2nd August 2001, 13:49
Yea, the box it came in and the length of the warranty are important too.:p

Twilightseer
2nd August 2001, 13:50
Originally posted by ElChevelle
Yea, the box it came in and the length of the warranty are important too.:p

Oh yes ! :D

NeoRenegade
2nd August 2001, 15:58
I'm going to use Windows 98 for sooo long. Sure there is the occasional crash, but it's good enough for me. I can usualy go without anything crashing for 3 days at a time.

Aeroe
2nd August 2001, 16:23
Originally posted by Twilightseer
Skinnability is not exactly a good criterium to choose an OS, imho.

that's why I tried out Redhat 7, due to the groovy effects and other useless shit :)
but anyways it's no less stable than 2k for me. if i can make everything look good, it's a plus. i just got this build 2 days ago.
w00t!

Nofx Guy
4th August 2001, 04:59
hmm i guess i never knew about the xp skinable thingy, ohwell, have any of you guys seen antitrust? that movie rocked, thats what should happen to micrsoft!

n_ick2000
5th August 2001, 02:57
Originally posted by Twilightseer
Skinnability is not exactly a good criterium to choose an OS, imho.

Windows XP looks good and it is like win2k and win9x put together. It loads really fast (within 10 seconds) and it is awesome. No more square windows, they are kinda curved. The color schemes are nice too. Windows XP is awesome and anybody that doesn't like it should be shot or be forced to use windows 1.0 on a 286 for the rest of their life.

Nofx Guy
6th August 2001, 03:04
Originally posted by n_ick2000
Originally posted by Twilightseer
Skinnability is not exactly a good criterium to choose an OS, imho.

Windows XP looks good and it is like win2k and win9x put together. It loads really fast (within 10 seconds) and it is awesome. No more square windows, they are kinda curved. The color schemes are nice too. Windows XP is awesome and anybody that doesn't like it should be shot or be forced to use windows 1.0 on a 286 for the rest of their life.

(rant)okey so it does look good, but the theres no way that it loads up in 10 seconds, AND THE GUI WAS DESIGNED BY A VIRGIN. I've used XP and I'd recommend like 4x the computer that you'd regularly run win2k on. Anandtech (http://www.anandtech.com) benched and proved that you actaully need a 2.0GHz to run what a 1.5 would in win2k.(/rant)

Nofx Guy
6th August 2001, 19:19
btw that last message i posted wasnt from me, it was from my [h]ardcore friend......

John M
7th August 2001, 02:45
dude, why do you alwyas put brackets around the h in hardcore? its gettin on my nerves, not knowin why it there :p

Nofx Guy
7th August 2001, 05:16
sorry man, it's from hardocp,also me and my friend do it, i just got in the habbit of doin it, i wont do it anymore :D

Someonebutnotme
12th August 2001, 03:37
Windows ME = Windows 98 Third Edition. What a piece of shit OS. Never have I seen a worse product. When XP comes out, it's going to be horrible. They're supposed to have a 64-bit version that can handle intel's itanium chip, but of course microsoft fucks up again and cannot break the 32-bit range. Total dumbass people. But .... the OS that will support itanium and beyond ... *NIX! Nice! This is a lesson for you all. XP will be shit, complete shit. Stick with the best for as long as you can. I personally run Windows 2000 SP 2 on my Athlon 700 Classic, and 512 megs ram. Runs perfectly. If you don't want to do an NT based, then do 98 Second Edition with every possibly update. Anyone using ME will be shot. :p

Ice
13th August 2001, 05:22
but Win2k is much more stable. Try leaving WinME on for a week or more.

Win2k loads on my computer (completly. from power on to AolIM loading) in less than 5 minutes. And I have SP2, and run 333mhz and 192mb of ram. There is somthing wrong if it takes 20 minutes.

simon snowflake
13th August 2001, 09:53
the only real problem i had with win 2K pro was the fact that my DVD did not work properly. It would read everything on it, but when i wanted to run a programm (setup.exe or something) the whole system would shut down. even after installing every service pack.

InvisableMan
13th August 2001, 10:37
Originally posted by nateJC
I dunno, I'm too confused by Sarge's upside-down title.

/me goes off and broods because mods get HTML in their titles and Major Dudes don't.



all it is is an image, probably a url set between two img tags...


click on it and it takes you to sarges homepage...

<oooh> http://www.darthsdomain.homestead.com/files/Fookknot.gif </oooh>

Bilbo Baggins
13th August 2001, 11:29
Win 2K takes about 3 minutes to start up from when i switch the computer on.

sgtfuzzbubble011
14th August 2001, 03:06
It takes you almost 5 mins to load Win2k, Ice? Hmmm... I'm running Win98SE and it only takes me about 1 min and 30 secs to load from power-on to Start Menu accessibility. But then again, I've got a 633 Celeron with 512 megs of RAM. :) And after another 30 secs, I'm on the net chatting, IMing, and forum surfing. :D


Invisable-
Uh oh... You found out my little secret. :p :)

Mr. Bojanglez
14th August 2001, 03:14
is xp going to beany good?

sgtfuzzbubble011
14th August 2001, 03:20
I heard that XP is going to blow llama turds. :)

And btw, Bojanglez... You don't have to put "Hmmmm" and "grrrrr" in all of your posts. The titles are optional unless you're starting a new thread. ;)

n_ick2000
14th August 2001, 04:34
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
I heard that XP is going to blow llama turds. :)

What are you talking about. Windows XP is awesome. Why does everybody think it sucks?

Bilbo Baggins
14th August 2001, 09:27
Because they are ignorant monkey peasants.

whiteflip
14th August 2001, 22:44
the windows os cant read more than 512mb of ram so who ever has more is a stupid fuck who likes to waste money on their own ignorance. windows 2000 is suppose to take around 40 seconds to start up. One its kernel takes that long to process itself. So if you spend that time starting it up why shut it down? suspend that sucker or put it in hybernation. Windows ME (better than 98se cuz i say so) takes seven seconds to boot. better than 15 of 98se.

whiteflip
14th August 2001, 22:48
windows me is better than 98se. its faster and it doesnt have that stupid annoying folder icon problem (people who use keyboard interface will know what im talking about) 98 crashes much more than me also

n_ick2000
15th August 2001, 03:19
Yeah. Windows Me is better than 98se. I don't like Windows Media Player 7 tho. I am dual booting Windows XP RC2 and Windows Me on my other computer. I checked my windows 2000 the other day and it took about 50 minutes to do a file and folder check on a 10 GB win98SE partition. I think I will upgrade windows 2000 to XP when it comes out.

Epistax
16th August 2001, 04:27
MS BOB RULES!!!!
(as long as you don't use it for what it's for)

I have dual (trio?) boot Win2k, Dos, Mandrake

Ice
22nd August 2001, 00:48
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
It takes you almost 5 mins to load Win2k, Ice? Hmmm... I'm running Win98SE and it only takes me about 1 min and 30 secs to load from power-on to Start Menu accessibility. But then again, I've got a 633 Celeron with 512 megs of RAM. :) And after another 30 secs, I'm on the net chatting, IMing, and forum surfing. :D


i dunno if that number is quite accurate... but it does take a while. i dont mind it since i only reboot once a week. we'll see how long it takes once i get my 1.4gHz t-bird.

what i have noticed is that win2k loads more when there is a loading screen winME and XP switch to the login screen while it's still "thinking".

sgtfuzzbubble011
22nd August 2001, 08:19
I usually shut my pooter down every night when I go to bed, but I've been leaving it on for the past few days. I'm setting a new uptime record for my system... So far I've kept it alive (including standby time) for 3 days 12 hours and 51 minutes. :) Not too shabby for a Win98SE box. ;)