What would be better to get?
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Joined
·
301 Posts
Is winxp compatible with older programs?
*
IMO, win2k is the best compared to winXP, since winXP is using the win2k' s kernels and is nothing more than an ersatz of it.
Besides i ve heard that winXP won t allow Java language (Sun and MS had troubles, and now the time to revenge has come it seems...)
I m using win2k and I ve had almost no troubles (or caused by me that is).
Bye
I haven't used XP yet so its hard for me to say... however I use Win 2K here and it is a very good Os. The only glitch is that it can be slighty more complex to get games running... although that said if you sre able to figure out how to configure plugins you shouldn't find it too taxing. The thing that puts me off XP is the fecking activation code. The amount of times I change hardware would means that I'd be having a conversation with microsoft on a very regular basis.
I did hear a rumor that they aren't putting the code into the pro version? can anyone back this up?
Oh and as for java... I find it convienent that microsofts c# languauge (designed to be competition for java) is almost ready for full implementation.
I did hear a rumor that they aren't putting the code into the pro version? can anyone back this up?
Oh and as for java... I find it convienent that microsofts c# languauge (designed to be competition for java) is almost ready for full implementation.
>I did hear a rumor that they aren't putting the code into the pro
>version?
I don't know if the pro version won't include the activation code, but supposedly "corporate versions" of Windows (that is, the ones that businesses buy bulk licenses for) won't, since it'd be too cumbersome/irritating for an IT staff.
Oh, and as for the original poster, I'd say go with 2k, since it's been out longer.
>version?
I don't know if the pro version won't include the activation code, but supposedly "corporate versions" of Windows (that is, the ones that businesses buy bulk licenses for) won't, since it'd be too cumbersome/irritating for an IT staff.
Oh, and as for the original poster, I'd say go with 2k, since it's been out longer.
>I still hate the activation key.
Oh, as do I. What a number of people have mentioned is thus: one of the things that many software companies mention in regards to the pricing of their programs is that because of piracy they must artificially inflate their prices. If that's true, shouldn't WinXP be cheaper, given that there should be fewer people pirating it? Heh.
>I'm a gamer so if Win2K has any bad problems with games or has
>a drop in framerate then thats bad
The problems that many people had with the OS when it was first released were the result of the infancy of the OS. As its matured (most) manufacturers/software companies have upgraded/changed their products to make them compatible, and combined with Microsoft's compatibility patches (gotten from Windows Update) things are running much better. Of course, there *are* a few companies that can't seem to be bothered with making drivers/patches available for the OS. You can check out compatibility for the software/hardware you own at NtCompatible
Though I can't speak for everyone, obviously, my framerate is actually better in Win2k.
Oh, as do I. What a number of people have mentioned is thus: one of the things that many software companies mention in regards to the pricing of their programs is that because of piracy they must artificially inflate their prices. If that's true, shouldn't WinXP be cheaper, given that there should be fewer people pirating it? Heh.
>I'm a gamer so if Win2K has any bad problems with games or has
>a drop in framerate then thats bad
The problems that many people had with the OS when it was first released were the result of the infancy of the OS. As its matured (most) manufacturers/software companies have upgraded/changed their products to make them compatible, and combined with Microsoft's compatibility patches (gotten from Windows Update) things are running much better. Of course, there *are* a few companies that can't seem to be bothered with making drivers/patches available for the OS. You can check out compatibility for the software/hardware you own at NtCompatible
Though I can't speak for everyone, obviously, my framerate is actually better in Win2k.
>Besides i ve heard that winXP won t allow Java language
It was announced earlier this week that WinXP won't ship with Java but there's little to prevent an OEM or the computer's end user from loading Sun's VM/libs. This is actually a *good* thing as the Java VM present within Internet Explorer doesn't support certain standard functions and doesn't follow the current Java spec.
>I find it convienent that microsofts c# languauge (designed to be
>competition for java) is almost ready for full implementation
The press release that mentioned Microsoft's abandoning of Java they make the none-too-subtle point of mentioning that MS would simply love you to port all of your applets over to .Net. Blech.
It was announced earlier this week that WinXP won't ship with Java but there's little to prevent an OEM or the computer's end user from loading Sun's VM/libs. This is actually a *good* thing as the Java VM present within Internet Explorer doesn't support certain standard functions and doesn't follow the current Java spec.
>I find it convienent that microsofts c# languauge (designed to be
>competition for java) is almost ready for full implementation
The press release that mentioned Microsoft's abandoning of Java they make the none-too-subtle point of mentioning that MS would simply love you to port all of your applets over to .Net. Blech.
G
Guest
·Yea, Sun's JRE owns MS's JVM..
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
