Win98SE vs Win2k Questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob's Mods
  • Start date Start date
B

Bob's Mods

New member
Currently I still am using Win98SE. Aside from an occasional crash, it runs just fine. I was wondering if there is a performance boost CPU wise moving up to Win2k from someone who has done the upgrade? Also, did you encounter any funky problems? I am using Sonar ver 2.2.
I know Win2k is more efficient and stable. I was curious to know if it actually reduces CPU usuage/loading (with plugins) over Win98SE due to it's improved efficiency.

thanks for any replies,
Bob
 
For the most part, when you step up to a newer Os, you use more processing power. Windows 98se is a good operating system, and runs fairly stable and fast. win 2k runs on a different kernal then 98. It is built on the windows nt kernal, which handles files differently (uses NTFS format, xp is built on the NT kernal as well) If you have an older computer, stick with the older os. Usually, putting a newer os in an older computer will slow it down, although with win 2k, you will not slow it down that much. If 98 is working fine, keep it.
 
gtar02 said:
If 98 is working fine, keep it.
Click to expand...
Providing it's Windows 98 SE.

I was doing all sorts of stuff with a Dell Pentium I @ 100mhz, 40 meg RAM and Win 98 SE and only 3 gig HD
Still using Win 98 SE, but with a Pentium II @ 350 / 128 meg RAM / 20 gig HD

The PC is stand-alone / no printers / no networking ... and runs software claiming a minimum 500 mhz

Runs MIDI quite fine. Connects to a Roland synth - MIDI in and out

Can do all sorts of audio recording and playback


Downside: My 52X CD burner can only acheive 40x
 
Win98SE is working just great for me. From time to time (not often) I have a crash but it always comes right back after reboot. And reboot is fast too. I have tweaked it to the max for sure.
I got a fresh copy of Win2k someone gave me and I have been tossing it up and down in my mind whether to load it. I've got such a stable running system (no drop out problems either) that I am leary to jump on an OS change.

Bob
 
frankly i dont think its worth an OS change if your happy with your current
stability.
 
If the system is stable, you won't get any benefit from 2k. When you get another computer, move on to a new OS.
 
I'll agree. No computer lasts forever, nor does the OS or software. Every few years you'll end up upgrading because a) the newer ones are faster b) newer software comes along that won't run on the old OS c) old computers die and d) even Micro$oft eventually improves.

I have been through all these scenarios; having started 4-1/2 years ago with 98SE and Cool Edit Pro 1.2a, I now have a 6-month old XP machine with Adobe Audition 1.5 (which won't run on 98SE). And it has gotten 'way better over that time span, too. I'd hate to go back to what I was working with in 2000.
 
I've recently upgrade my OS from win98SE to win2000 on my AMD athlon circa 2000, its old but still runs Acid 4.0 and soundforge 7.0 fairly well. I have yet to find any major benefit. I would skip the win2000 upgrade and wait until you can upgrade your computer and use winXP.
 
I believe everyone has offered some sound advice here. I will wait until I am forced to upgrade my computer system. Right now I can say I'm happy with my systems performance and the current round of software revisions I'm using. They are stable and sound decent. It took a long time for software to improve. For years it was crashy or just didn't possess any professional polish. It was shocking just how sucky PC recording was in the mid to late 90s. It was a promise that couldn't deliver.

Bob
 
I've got one piece of software I can't part ways with that is 98 only, so I have a dual boot system, everything else is on XP which is vastly more stable. The 98 networking never worked well either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top