|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Frankly, I'm really upset with Omega Research regarding their
incompatibilities with Windows 2k. I have been using Win2k since Release
Candidate 1 and it has proven to be an excellent upgrade. However, when
installing TS 2k on Win2k it's been nothing but a pain in the butt.
Their installation routine requires that MDAC be installed but the install
code never checks if the existing MDAC is >= 2.1. Which it is on Win2k.
So....it does nothing but install MDAC, reboot, install MDAC, reboot, and so
on and so on. I've called Tech SUpport on this and after changing some
registry entries I was able to get TS 2k to install. After that, TS2k has
run perfectly...well as good as their product is capable of running.
Now, just yesterday, my HD crashed on my Win2k machine. I'm reinstalling
Win2k but again, CAN'T install TS2k!! When I first called them on this
issue I asked the tech support rep to put the instructions online for anyone
else that may have this issue (under the knowledge bases or FAQ) - in
addition I figured I might need it again in the future and didnt write down
the steps as we went along. Now, It still isn't on their site and I'm once
again dead in the water in regards to their product.
Omega says their Update 5 will be out in March. What is the deal!? Win2k
has been in development for over 3 years now - it's not like they havent had
time to figure out what patches need to be made. Go figure. Another comedy
of errors on Omega's part.
-IMarshal
-----Original Message-----
From: CFischer [mailto:compsig@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2000 2:42 AM
To: omega-list; M. Simms
Subject: Re: [Re: Windows 2000 Professional; MAYBE great news]
So do I, Claus.
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: M. Simms <prosys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
An: IMarshal <imarshal@xxxxxxxxxx>; Omega Research <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Gesendet: Montag, 21. Februar 2000 23:59
Betreff: RE: [Re: Windows 2000 Professional; MAYBE great news]
> 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
> >
>
>
|