|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Yeah - but we are now at the mercy of Omega....TS2000i is completely "hosed"
under Win2000 till SP5 !!
I am STILL awaiting the SP4C CDs.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IMarshal [mailto:imarshal@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2000 7:20 PM
> To: Omega Research
> Subject: RE: [Re: Windows 2000 Professional; MAYBE great news]
>
>
> I too have been using Windows 2000 since RC 1 was out. I just
> received the
> Final Release a couple of days ago. This has to be the most
> stable OS I've
> ever used, with the exception of Linux. I've even crashed NT 4.0 on a
> frequent basis... but this Win2k is really impressive.
>
> If you are using NT 4.0 to run TS2k or any investment software, which is
> what you should be using and *NOT* windows 98 (for *many* reasons). In my
> opinion, Windows 2k is a must upgrade. It's not just a facelift,
> this thing
> is REALLY impressive.
>
> Just my 2cents
>
> -IMarshal
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Berentson [mailto:shavenheads@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2000 5:50 PM
> To: Patrick White; omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Re: Windows 2000 Professional; MAYBE great news]
>
>
> I went the the Windows 2000 launch today. It appears that the
> most important
> new features were designed to make a network administrator's job
> significantly
> easier as well as adding flexibility. The theme was the IS manager as
> Platonic
> caretaker (read Fascist dictator). Microsoft is beginning to
> understand that
> the common man just cares about the functionality. They claimed that a
> virgin
> machine, with no operating system installed, could plug into a network and
> come away with a fully funcational machine. This should help sell it into
> the
> business community. For the individual user, it is NT4 with a Win98
> interface
> and features, with infrared, USB and DVD support built in.
>
> "Patrick White" <simgenie@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > It seems to me that much of the negative comments regarding Windows 2000
> > come from people who haven't yet installed it on their machines. I have
> been
> > happily running Win2K on my machine for the last 3-4 months with great
> > success. I did the upgrade from Win98, and I'm not going back.
> If you have
> > NT, the reasons for upgrading would be:
> >
> > 1) Stay ahead of the Microsoft upgrade curve so you continue to get
> > "upgrade" prices.
> >
> > 2) Multiple Monitor support.
> >
> > 3) It is about as easy to use as Win98
> >
> > If you are running Win98, There are some pretty solid reasons to upgrade
> to
> > Win2K:
> >
> > 1) Stability of NT (I have only had about 2 times where the whole system
> > went down and those times were related to my video driver. I can keep it
> up
> > for a week or two with no problems. One program crashing doesn't bring
> down
> > the whole system. Even if Explorer crashes, the system stays up!)
> >
> > 2) Ability to run TS 4.0 in a separate memory space like NT. I
> did manage
> to
> > get TS4 installed and running according to the instructions on the Omega
> web
> > site.
> >
> > 3) Built in firewall / web server / mail server capabilities
> >
> > At very least, if you have a LAN that uses a Win98 machine as your
> gateway,
> > I would suggest upgrading that machine to Win2K. The upgrade
> from win98 to
> > 2000 is really a no brainer just because of the stability issues.
> >
> > caveat:
> > The OS seems to use more memory, so I would suggest 128MB for
> comfort with
> > 96MB as a bare minimum.
> >
> > Patrick White
> >
> >
>
>
> jfb
> shaven heads trading
> new york city
>
|