|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
But several users have told me ts4 does not work under Win2k, and I'm
unwilling to give ts4 up at this time. Is this correct?--or has someone
created a patch or work around for ts4....
MS
Gary Fritz wrote:
> > I went with WIN98se simply because I wanted an optical drive with
> > a harware decoder, and there were no WIN 2000 drivers available for
> > this vendor's hardware decoder's drives. If I had it to do over
> > again though, I'd definitely go with WIN 2000....it sure couldn't
> > be worse than 98.
>
> Win98 is just a dressed-up Win95, which is mostly just a cosmetic
> update to Win 3.1, which is a pretty face on top of DOS. All of them
> have fundamental flaws and weaknesses in their design that make it
> extremely difficult to write solid and reliable applications.
>
> Win ME is basically Win98 with fewer options. To quote the estimable
> Fred Langa, "It's Windows with training wheels. As such, it'll be
> great for utter newbies because they won't be able to get themselves
> into much trouble. ... any moderately experienced Windows user will
> feel stymied and hemmed in by WinME's deliberate limitations."
>
> WinNT, on the other hand, has almost nothing in common with the Win9x
> family. It was designed from the ground up as an honest-to-God
> operating system, by people (NOT from Microsoft) who had actually
> done that successfully in the past. It's far more bullet-proof than
> Win9x ever dreamed of being.
>
> Win2k, as I understand it, is the next generation of WinNT.
> Everything I've heard says it's better, faster, and more solid than
> WinNT, even though it's barely out of the lab. It sounds as though
> Microsoft learned from their betters and took NT to the next level of
> functionality and reliability.
>
> If I wasn't already on NT, I'd absolutely upgrade to Win2K. IMHO the
> Win9x platform is not suitable for mission-critical applications.
> Since I already have a very stable platform, I'll give Win2K a few
> releases to get even more solid & get some more drivers &etc, but I
> will eventually move. Win2K is obviously the future of Windows.
>
> Gary
|