OS for capture

[dadrab]

I'm a little off the beaten path here, and it’s entirely possible that this post belongs elsewhere, but since the ultimate goal of my computer build is analog capture, I figured I’d ask the question here.

I’ve spared little expense building this system as I plan for it to last me a while. However, in an attempt to save a little money, I’ve been thinking seriously about using Windows 2000 Professional as my operating system instead of investing the $140 or so in XP Pro.

I’d like some opinions on which OS some of you folks think is superior. Personally, I use 2000 Pro at home and like it just fine. I use XP Pro at work and find it to be fine too.

I know both are based on basically the same NT platform. My concerns center around some of the better applications not being compatible with 2000, but certainly there are things about the differences in operating systems I’m not aware of.

I’d welcome some feedback on this.

Besides, like I said, this isn’t a question that pops up every day around here. Perhaps the better minds that inhabit this corner of the web could weigh in on my dilemma.

Thanks in advance. You folks are scary smart.

[solarfox]

I personally have had no problems using Windows 2000 Pro as the OS on my video editing system; it gets along with my hardware just fine, and all of the "big iron" applications I've used (Media Studio Pro, DVDLab, TMPGenc, DVD Workshop, and even ReelDVD) seem happy to run under it. I'd say by all means, save yourself the $$ and use it.

When you get right down to it, XP and Win2K are pretty much the same core OS under the hood... XP just has flashier bells and whistles and a few tweaks that probably won't be an issue on a dedicated video-editing station anyway.

[BruceSD]

I have used Win2000 for editing, transcoding etc. video and never had any incompatibility problems. But just be aware future software and hardware drivers may not work with Win2000. Microsoft will also stop issuing updates and fixes for Win2000 soon (probably not a big deal for a video workstation.) I prefer Win2000 myself, moe bare-bones and less bloated. However, if you take the time to tweak WinXP, it is comparable to Win2000 in effeciency.

I'd say give Win2000 a shot with your existing software and hardware. You already have a copy, see if it works for you before buying XP.

If you have a single processor in your system, XP Home should work fine for you, and save you some money. You can find an OEM copy on NewEgg for about $89. I'd only shell out the money for XP Pro if you have more than one processor, there isn't much to be gained from XP Pro otherwise. You can get a copy of XP Pro OEM on NewEgg for $140.

[dadrab]

Thanks y'all.

I believe I'll give 2000Pro a try and see how it goes.