Home Recorder Friendly OS

  • Thread starter Thread starter Whyte Ice
  • Start date Start date
W

Whyte Ice

The Next Vanilla Ice
What is the ultimate Home Recorder's OS?

I am currently using Win98SE and thinking about going to 2000.

I use Cool Edit for tracking/mixing/editing and all that junk.
 
I would surely get rid of 98.....2K is fine, but XP is better.
 
Does anybody use or have used BeOS? I read about it a while ago and it was being touted as THE thing for musicians working with PCs but you never hear anything about it.
 
I think that 2K is substantially more robust and graceful at everything than XP, but XP is ok too. Plus MS is already starting to phase out 2K support and going with XP at this point in the game probably just makes more sense.

Slackmaster 2000
 
I've heard that there have been alot of bugs with XP and that 2000 is this most stable.

Why do you guys say XP is better than 2000? Just curious.

If I were to get XP, whats the huge difference between Home and Pro and which is more suitable for recording, I would think Pro.
 
Home or Pro wouldn't make a difference for Home Recording... "Pro" is basically just a means to make business pay more. They took the "Pro" version, turned off certain networking capabilities (something businesses need) and removed things like multi-processor support (more things that businesses need), lowered the price, and called it "Home". That way, Joe Schmoe can get XP for 95 bucks... Businesses, meanwhile, have to pay a hundred bucks more for the same exact OS with a few vital features enabled.

But it'll make no difference to the average home user, and shouldn't have an impact on recording.

I, quite frankly, like XP better. I've found it to be more stable than 2K. But really, there's not much difference. They're built on the same kernel. They have very similar features/interfaces. The only thing you get with XP is visual "fluff" (which I turn off) and built in apps like CD burning capabilities and zip compression (which I like to have, because now I don't need to install as many third-party apps). I run three servers on my XP box, and I use it for my DAW,... and I've never had a more stable machine than the one I'm running on right now.

WATYF
 
My XP machine at work has pissed away to the point where I'm wondering if I didn't accidentally install Windows 98.

You know what finally killed it? An installation of Office XP. Hehe, oh well. I'll have to reinstall one of these days.

I've got maybe 15 Win2k machines here and perhaps 8 XP machines...very similar hardware in all of them. The 2K machines I never really hear from. The XP machines are like....like trying to get a group of lazy fat kids on a bus. Yeah they all make it to school on time, but they're annoying as hell.

The interface and many components (hardware wizards and the like) really need to be fleshed out better in XP. They look fine, but have a tendancy to hang a lot while they "think".....it's like, ok, I'm installing this piece of hardware and I know damn well the driver I want is on this freakin disk right here, this should only take a few seconds.....hey, what the hell are you doing?

But I know I know, "it works perfectly for me." :p

Slackmaster 2000
 
I'm not saying one is better than another. My experience is Win 2k is great for homerecording. I use a Delta 1010 with Sonar and Cool Edit and have no problems.:cool:
 
Last edited:
FWIW,

I use Cubase VST 5.1 on a 1.7GHz ME system. Hardly any mentionable probs.

I also have Cubase SX on a 1.1 GHz XP system. I have to agree with Slack. Aside from the slower processor, it hardly seems faster than my 150 MHz Win95 sytem.
 
To be fair, I haven't used win2000, but XP is working. Maybe my opinion isn't worth shit here.
 
Nah, there are so many different configurations that it's impossible to say *for sure* that 2K is better than XP or vice versa. So far my experience has been quite annoying, thus I haven't upgraded any of my home machines and won't until I have to.

When I buy new machines though, I get them with XP...it's just better business.

I think Whyte Ice is pretty safe regardless of which he gets, as long as he does get XP or 2K. I have yet to hear of anything developed for XP that doesn't work on 2K....yet. They both have very good roots, and if properly configured and maintained, can provide a much better experience than any 9x operating system.

Slackmaster 2000
 
If I get XP, there is one thing I'm worried about thats not recording-related. Drivers.

I have all the drivers for all of my hardware and all of them support XP except my network card. They haven't released a driver for XP yet and wondering how I would use it if I got XP.

I have a Delta 44 and I've heard of some issues with 2000/XP concerning WDM drivers or something like that. Whats that all about and would it effect me if I upgrade?
 
Don't worry too much about the Delta WDM issue because

1) It's being fixed (really, it is).
2) You don't have to use low latency WDM. You couldn't use it on 9x anyhow. ASIO is always an option...as are the regular old standards like MME and DS.
3) It's a track offset problem that doesn't have to be a big deal for all users. It's not like a problem where the card won't *work* or anything.

Here's my webpage dedicated to the Delta WDM problem: http://www.slackmaster2000.com/articles/WDM/wdmprob.html

If your network card doesn't have XP drivers, get a new network card. Seriously, $15. I wouldn't want anything without XP support in my machine anyhow. If neither the manufacturer nor microsoft supports the device on XP, then UGH! Chances are though, it will be supported and XP/2K will install it without even asking you for any help! The driver support in 2K/XP is mind blowing....and rarely if ever will you find 2K only drivers, they will almost always be 2K/XP.

Really the big driver hurdle was moving from 9x to 2K. Moving from 2K to XP is more like a bump....that you can't feel. :)

Slackmaster 2000
 
XP is my choice. Ive switched to everyone trying them. Hated all but refused to go to XP for a while because it was too new and stuff. Now im fully converted to XP. Its amazing.

danny
 
WATYF is right about the kernal thing. XP is a newer 2k. Just the interface is slightly different. 2k was designed more for buisnesses especially networks. XP is made more for home use. Either way I have had no problem with XP and they supposed to be releasing a new version of XP next year.
 
Slackmaster2K said:
My XP machine at work has pissed away to the point where I'm wondering if I didn't accidentally install Windows 98....
But I know I know, "it works perfectly for me." :p
Click to expand...
Maybe all your XP woes are just the result of a PEBKAC issue... ;) :p :D

Actually.. that's the one thing I dislike aboot XP. They force that stupid "driver wizard" on you and it automatically installs stuff even if you're not ready yet. Every time I do a detonator upgrade, the dumb thing dumps the default drivers on there before I can install the detonators.

But I dunno,... maybe I'm a unique case... since I configure my systems so tightly... and since I turn off all the fluff... and I'm talking.. I turn off the Luna GUI... I turn off Web integration... I turn off error reporting.. I turn off help and support... I turn off universal plug and play... you name it.. if it ain't absolutely necessary... it ain't running on my box. :p So my rock solid stability may be a little different than most people's experiences with XP,.. but regardless... I still have found it to be the best M$ O/S ever, since it is just as stable as 2K, (if not more) and it has built in features that I actually want.


P.S. Whyte... I use a Delta 44 with the WDM drivers and I have no problems at all.


WATYF
 
"The XP machines are like....like trying to get a group of lazy fat kids on a bus. Yeah they all make it to school on time, but they're annoying as hell. "


Now THAT is a great quote.

If I were to rate my favorite (non-Mac) OSs, it would be:

1) XP - More consumer & hardware friendly than 2000. If you can get working drivers for it, it should be your first choice. I say this despite the fact I have given up trying to get my Audiophile to run using WDM drivers in Sonar, I'm using MME drivers and it's working fine.

2) Win 98SE - I'm biased because I have spent so much time with this OS that I know it really well. It just seems better to me in almost every way than ME.

3) Win 2000 - Stable, but the plug'n'play seems to not be all there, and too many games don't work on it to use on a general purpose PC. Again, if you have working drivers for your music gear, it's fine.


One's I would not use -

4) Windows ME - too buggy, it just seems far more crash prone than 98SE. Probably should never have been released, but Bill needed a new house.

5) Win NT4 - Too old, too cryptic, hard to trouble shoot, no plug'n'pray. No need to use it when 2000 or XP are available.

6) Win95 - Get real.
 
Good points by RWhite.

A couple of thoughts:

1. Like I may have mentioned, I've had no/minimal problems with ME. Definitely less problems than 98SE.

2. According to the 98SE upgrade box, it offers improved/faster performance. Bullshit. I upgraded a 200MHz 95 system to 98SE. Before the upgrade, it was decent. After the upgrade, everything seemed like it was running through Jell-o. I.e., slooooow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top