Windows 2000 question.

[AlecWest]

Eventually, I want to convert completely to one or more Linux distros. However, in the interim, I've decided to pare-down my Win98SE/WinXP dual-boot system into one Windows OS - Windows 2000. I've acquired an OEM for Windows 2000 Pro SP4. And my question, primarily for Windows 2000 users, is if there's anything Windows 2000 can't do that WinXP can do.

I already know of the issue dealing with hard drives over 128GB. But since my new system will only be using 80GB hard drives, it's not a personal issue with me. The one thing that convinced me to take this interim move was when I discovered that Hauppauge still offers driver support for Win2K. But to be safe (grin), I downloaded all of them just in case that support stance changes tomorrow, hehe.

FWIW, the only reason I upgraded to XP is because I wanted to escape the 4GB limitation of FAT32 to do video work. And at the time I upgraded, WinXP was available. Had I known (blush) that Win2K was NTFS, didn't require online activation, and didn't "phone home" all the time, I'd probably never gone to XP. Oh, well. Live and learn.

P.S. And yes, Hauppauge 150/250/500 cards are now supported under Linux. However, there's a different capture utility (I guess) that WinTV2k.

[bigstusexy]

I don't think xp is that bad but I'm not going to argue.

So far the only thing I know of is that a few programs are specifically written for XP and require its kernal or Volume Shadow copy, these are more technical programs and not video editing authoring. I don't think you'll have a problem there, and for 48bit addressing it isn't that hard to enable if you need it.

Officially support for 2k is over there is still extended support so you might be patched for significant issues, newer offerings though will be locked out, so far just freebies like photostory, windows defender, ie7.

[liquid217]

You can enable 48 bit LBA in windows 2000 so that it supports HDDs larger than 137gig.
http://www.largeharddrivesupport.windowsreinstall.com/win2k.htm#3%20-%20Registry%20Changes

Apart from that here are a few differences.
-XP theme stuff
-cleartype
-fast user switching
-Windows Movie Maker
-built in cd burning support

[gerryc]

I could be wrong about this. Maybe there's a way around it, but I recently had a machine that had win 2000 and I could not get it to recognize older win 95 and 98 programs. I know XP has the compatibility feature to recognize them.

[AlecWest]

Thanks to everyone for advice. One issue I didn't mention might not be a Win2K issue. But I know that Win98SE only recognizes RAM up to 512mb. Is there a similar limitation in Win2K? One other possible issue. I use the PVR150 (non-MCE) PCI card by Hauppauge. And to get it to work properly, I use the Hauppauge "tweak tool" done by a 3rd party. I've visited the site and it doesn't mention whether or not the tweak tool is compatible with Win2K. If anyone knows whether it is, let me know.

I could be wrong about this. Maybe there's a way around it, but I recently had a machine that had win 2000 and I could not get it to recognize older win 95 and 98 programs. I know XP has the compatibility feature to recognize them.

Yup. I realize there may be some Win98SE and older utilities I may have to abandon. But most of them have been superceded by other utilities that will work under Win2K. As long as I have a stable system until I can fully convert to Linux, that will be enough.

[AlecWest]

You can enable 48 bit LBA in windows 2000 so that it supports HDDs larger than 137gig.
http://www.largeharddrivesupport.windowsreinstall.com/win2k.htm#3%20-%20Registry%20Changes

Thanks for that info. But for me, it probably won't be an issue. BTW, rather than the 80GB hard drives I'd planned on getting, I notice Seagate has 120GB PATA drives on sale for $59. Think I'll get a couple. My next system won't be "new" per-se, just "newer." And since my current system uses PATA drives well, I don't think I'll be getting a motherboard that likes SATA. They might be better than PATA drives but, to me, "If it ain't broke, I won't fix it" ... and don't want to fret about installing drivers off a floppy disk during the installation process.

Apart from that here are a few differences.
-XP theme stuff

Not an issue.

-cleartype

Not sure what that is.

-fast user switching

I'm the only user (grin).

-Windows Movie Maker

I've used that a few times but didn't really like it. It never worked the way I thought it was supposed to work.

-built in cd burning support

I'm not sure what you mean there. Burning CDs on Win98SE was never a problem. And Win98SE recognized my DVD burner as a DVD burner ... though I never had much use for burning DVDs under Win98SE. If Win98SE recognized my DVD burner, I suspect Win2K will also.

[classfour]

The only thing I noted when running win 2K was that it wouldn't run some games that XP could - on the same machine.

[SLK001]

I have both XP and 2000 installation disks. I have relegated my XP disk to creation of BartPE disks only (I do have a virtual XP machine under VMWare). A lot of Adobe new releases will only work on XP (for instance, Premiere Pro). That is why I no longer upgrade my Adobe products.

The only thing that XP has that I like that 2000 doesn't is that placing an icon on the desktop can be set to automatically line up (Align to Grid).

Go ahead and stick with 2000.

[liquid217]

cleartype is a font smoothing function in XP/vista. It makes onscreen text look more pleasing to the eye. For an example, see here: http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/02/03/524367.aspx

by built in cd burning support, i mean XP allows you to drag and drop files right through explorer to burn a cd. This isn't really an issue if you already use another burning utility.

-Another XP plus (if thats what you want to call it) is that it supports IE7.. 2k does not.

[AlecWest]

-Another XP plus (if thats what you want to call it) is that it supports IE7.. 2k does not.

Funny you should mention that (grin). I upgraded to IE7 on my XP partition. And one of the first things I planned to do on my Win2K system was "downgrade" to IE6 (unless it comes preinstalled). I like the way IE6 looks better than IE7. Either way, though, my browser of choice is Firefox.

Thanks.

P.S. Anyone know what the memory limitation (if any) is for Win2K? I know that Win98SE has issues if system memory exceeds 512mb ... and wondered if Win2K has a similar issue.

[BogieV]

Well I had Win2k and WinXP but switched to WinXP on my second PC too.
Main reason - WinXP is a bit more user friendly and a bit more polished visually.
Particularly the Windows Explorer and the way it deals with icons and media.
For example Win2k preview doesn't have Film strip or thumbnail preview. No thumbnails of folders with the first photo (or frame) from the media in that folder, etc., etc.
For me this is the most significant difference between the 2 systems.
Just my 2 cents.

[Xylob the Destroyer]

I ran Win2K with 768M RAM and had no problems.
In fact, adding the 256 stick the existing 512 made a noticable difference in performance.
Beyond 768M, I don't know.

[redwudz]

RAM support for W2000 is the same as XP, 4GB. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555223

Also handy for W2000 installs is Autopatcher. All the updates in one package. http://www.autopatcher.com/

My only irritation with W2000 is having the 'Computer' icon always on the desktop. But that's minor.
BTW, is there any way to just have it in the start up menu instead?

[bevills1]

Setting up internet connection is a bit easier in XP but not that difficult in 2k, and the 137 GB limit was fixed for 2k with SP4. Win2k comes with IE5, and you'd need to upgrade to IE6 which is what I use in Win2k on 2 different systems. I have Win98SE and Win2k dual boot and plan to keep that even if I wanted to add Linux. Actually I ran same systems with Mandrake 10 also for a while but finally remove Linux because I find Windows much easier to use plus so much software designed for Windows. FYI you may like to create Win2k slipstreamed with SP4 by using nLite, a free download from http://www.nliteos.com/.

[AlanHK]

I could be wrong about this. Maybe there's a way around it, but I recently had a machine that had win 2000 and I could not get it to recognize older win 95 and 98 programs. I know XP has the compatibility feature to recognize them.

I'm running Win2k SP4.
768 MB RAM, all recognised.

I run lots of DOS, Win 3, Win 95, Win98 apps. Only a few Microsoft multimedia or games have failed to run; I think they use undocumented hacks. Probably there are work-arounds you can dig up on forums or usenet if it's important to you, at worst you can run a virtual machine. Just about all newer software runs too if you install .net.

[DarrellS]

The only thing that XP has that I like that 2000 doesn't is that placing an icon on the desktop can be set to automatically line up (Align to Grid).

Right click Desktop > Line Up Icons
I don't like to automatically arrange any icons but...right click > arrange icons > auto arrange

Win2k preview doesn't have Film strip or thumbnail preview.

The My Pictures folder has a built in viewer. If you want to view thumbnails then get Irfanview and use the thumbnail viewer.

BTW, I like to keep My Computer, Windows Explorer, System Information and any other folder that I use alot on my desktop.

People say that XP is more user friendly than W2K but I disagree. XP was made for users that didn't know how to use Windows. W2K allows users to do what they're used to doing in Windows so it's less friendly to them and like the OP stated, it doesn't phone home and it doesn't force you to activate the OS online or even register it for that matter.

It's not a gaming system though. It's a workstation system. Graphics, Multimedia etc... If you want to play games then Windows 98 works just fine.

Support will last till 2010. We'll see what happens then with so many office and workstation users refusing to updrade to systems that are no better than what they already have.

[SLK001]

I don't like to automatically arrange any icons but...right click > arrange icons > auto arrange.

I like my arrangement of my icons. With auto-arrange off, the only way to get the icons on "grid" is to right-click, Line Up Icons. XP can automate this - 2000 cannot.

[gadgetguy]

... My only irritation with W2000 is having the 'Computer' icon always on the desktop. But that's minor.
BTW, is there any way to just have it in the start up menu instead?

To remove all icons from the desktop, use Show Web Content On My Active Desktop and use a local HTML image for the background. (I do not recommend using an actual web page from the internet.) You can put a shortcut to Windows Explorer in the startup menu by locating explorer.exe, then drag and drop it onto the Start button. It's not exactly like My Computer, but you can accomplish the same things.

[winifreid]

I have 2000 and a gig of ram. There is no problem with my 250 gig HD either. I originally got 2000 because it was cheaper, at the time, than XP. The only thing XP can do that I like is use the online movie player from Netflix. But my laptop has XP, so no wukies.

[codecpage]

I have identically installed 2k and XP on the same computer and the 'differences' are practically negligible. No wonder, M$ also names 2000 "NT 5.1" and XP "NT 5.2".

The main differnces apart from the optics (that I've tuned down anyway) are:

- XP pro remote desktop. Maybe the only real goodie, as the 3rd party programs I've tired for this were all too buggy.

- Firewire network. Pretty useless, as in reality it hardly runs faster than simple 100 M Ethernet and there is no way just to add it to an Ethernet as an additional route.

- There is also a real problem in my opinion, with the mouse acceleration that apparently has been intended to offer more flexibility but has been abandoned in mid development, so a construction place with no proper documentation and a mouse that reacts like paralyzed ("molasses mouse") is all that came out. It took me days to develop a cure (details on my web page).

- Other problems in 2K are legions of useless "services" added, like a firewall that is literally a joke and some other nuisances. Not a real problem as you can switch them off.

- Activation. Paranoia.

I could have switched to XP meanwhile as everything works exactly like in 2k, but one problem is an utterly unreliable standby function (works perfectly with 2k). This may be a hardware incompatibility. It appears that any time M$ changes something with power management, motherboards take 5 years until they finally work with it.

Bottom line: XP was meant for revenues to its creator. Simply updating doesn't pay, but selling people a new OS does.

Cheers

[Dv8ted2]

is if there's anything Windows 2000 can't do that WinXP can do.

XP had better driver support out of the box. XP has the built in remote desktop connection. XP has the built in firewall

[AlecWest]

It's not a gaming system though. It's a workstation system. Graphics, Multimedia etc... If you want to play games then Windows 98 works just fine.

Support will last till 2010. We'll see what happens then with so many office and workstation users refusing to updrade to systems that are no better than what they already have.

I've never been a "gamer" so that's not an issue. And the support for Win2K is an important plus. By the time it expires, my end system should be firing on all thrusters (or the important ones at least). And who knows ... by the time it expires, I might have already gravitated completely to one or more Linux distros. But its important to me to have a reasonably stable system that won't die just because I upgrade hardware or switch computers in the interim. And if I can't "do it all" in Linux, I want to have that stable ace in the hole to fall back on.

Again, thanks to all who responded. I really feel embarassed that I was clueless to Win2K's features and abilities at the time I upgraded to XP. But, better late than never.

[SatStorm]

The only video related problem I know, is that Mediaportal has problems on win2K.

Also, some games won't work on win2K (Personally I don't care, I play only MAME...).

IMO, Win2K is about 10 - 15% faster winXP on video encoding related things. (virtualdub, TMPGEnc 2.5, mpeg2vcr... Yeap, I'm old school... Even the unofficial vfm x264 on virtualdub encodes slighty faster with win2K)

Regarding the hardware: I have 1GB of RAM , 2 SATA 500GB discs, a Pioneer DVD-R and a 400GB PATA HD. No problems with win2K

Regarding the internet, I use Firefox/Opera.

IMO, Win2K is M$ best OS ever!

[stiltman]

The only video related problem I know, is that Mediaportal has problems on win2K.

Also, some games won't work on win2K (Personally I don't care, I play only MAME...).

IMO, Win2K is about 10 - 15% faster winXP on video encoding related things. (virtualdub, TMPGEnc 2.5, mpeg2vcr... Yeap, I'm old school... Even the unofficial vfm x264 on virtualdub encodes slighty faster with win2K)

Regarding the hardware: I have 1GB of RAM , 2 SATA 500GB discs, a Pioneer DVD-R and a 400GB PATA HD. No problems with win2K

Regarding the internet, I use Firefox/Opera.

IMO, Win2K is M$ best OS ever!

Yep, all the same reasons I have not switched to XP or Vista.
I went from NT4 to Win2K and stayed there.
I've been on Win2K since beta1 came out on Technet

I have yet to see the need to upgrade yet. I suppose when I need a certain software package that I want, that only runs on XP or Vista, I will upgrade.

BTW, I use Win2K at home, but support NT4/Win2K/XP/Vista/2003R2 at work.

[SLK001]

IMO, Win2K is M$ best OS ever!

I'll second that! It's one of the most stable of their OS's, there are no problems with drivers and it doesn't have the awful "XP Themes" crap.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Well, Windows 2000 is "officially" NT 5.0 and XP is NT 5.1 (Vista is 6.0). So the differences will be slight between Win2K SP4 and XP.

Aside from the visual differences, there are some fundamental "under-the-hood" differences that can make software not function under 2000. With each minor upgrade (i.e., from 5.0 to 5.1) or Service Pack release, MS adds new functionality to the various APIs that make up Windows. Some of these new functions are a great benefit to software developers - making their lives a lot easier. One area I'm familiar with is the transfer of data via FireWire to/from a DV camcorder. Writing software that does such transfer is much easier under XP than 2000, particular for the added functionality such as finding out what features the camcorder has etc. It's possible with 2000 but requires a lot more effort by the developer.

[mjack425]

West, I luv W2k, because it's a OS that some of your major commercial company's still use to this day, and you don't have the activation problem u have with Xp, The main difference I've noticed is that a lot of new software programs, only use WinXp, and the support for W2k is fading.
As 4 me it's a wonderful OS.

[Seeker47]

The only thing that XP has that I like that 2000 doesn't is that placing an icon on the desktop can be set to automatically line up (Align to Grid).
Go ahead and stick with 2000.

Yeah, I'm primarily a 2K user also, who has just futzed around with XP a bit for some specific things. Because I'm much less familiar with the crummy (IMO), eye-candy XP GUI, I don't know the answer to this question, and maybe someone here can tell me. With 2K, I can drag and place desktop icons exactly where I want them to go, seemingly to the millimeter. And it stays put. In XP, they seem to have a mind of their own, and fight me. I move one right here, and it jumps to an approximate position nearby, closer than I'd like to adjacent icons. WTF ? Desktop Gravity ? (In neither case was any default selected by me.)

[Seeker47]

I have identically installed 2k and XP on the same computer and the 'differences' are practically negligible. No wonder, M$ also names 2000 "NT 5.1" and XP "NT 5.2".
. . .
- There is also a real problem in my opinion, with the mouse acceleration that apparently has been intended to offer more flexibility but has been abandoned in mid development, so a construction place with no proper documentation and a mouse that reacts like paralyzed ("molasses mouse") is all that came out. It took me days to develop a cure (details on my web page).

Guess I missed that url . . . but I'd be interested to find out. Is this why the mousewheel scrolling in XP sux ? (It seems to flow like melting rubber.)

- Other problems in 2K are legions of useless "services" added, like a firewall that is literally a joke and some other nuisances. Not a real problem as you can switch them off.

Good, I'll do that next. At least the TweakUI options in AutoPatcher killed off the XP "Search Pup", the flying bubble tips, and the Windows Alert Center constantly nagging me to turn Windows Update back on, etc.

[dcsos]

One thing win 2k can't estimate time remaining on file transfers over 4 gig it shows garbage ##'s

(not that XP or Vista's estimates are accurate, they just can see over 4gig on the network and show capacity of network drives)

Win 2K offers a fantastic feature not available in XP: Preview of movies in explorer windows,
like OS X for MAC a small Media Player preview appears when you higlight any media clip..Don't try QuickTiime files tho' as this crashes explorer