Partitioning program

2»

Comments

  • I'm just preferential to 2000, it's newer, seems to be smoother around the edges, and if he needs help with it more ppl here have used 2000 then NT4 (I think) (:wink: on the last one). And if he could use XP on it, 2000 should fit easily.

    -Q
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • It just has a more concerted feel to it.

    2000 is perfectly capable of being used as a server, and while they may not get used very often, the administration tools for 2000 certainly seem to be more usable then the NT4 ones.

    And also, 2000 is still supported and getting updates, NT4 has been dropped, from what I can tell.

    -Q
  • Q wrote:
    seems to be smoother around the edges,


    Its called font-smoothing


    Or whatever that thing is
  • No, I mean the whole UI seems to be more coherent. Like all the MMCs, instead of whatever those things were that NT4 had.

    -Q
  • edited November 2004
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • I understand what you're thinking perfectly, but am waiting for his input/opinion on all this.

    -Q
  • The reason I am using 98se is cause of compatability. I want to play my old games that my newer and way to fast computer cannot. Since XP is based off the NT kernal I can't play some games cause they will not work in nt and they think XP is NT. I will dual boot if I get a bigger hd.
    That's a perfectly good reason Constitutional Defender since you want to
    use it for more than one thing. You're probably going to have a lot
    of downtime though with 98 but you don't have to commit the machine
    to just one purpose. Dual booting probably won't help though 'cause
    you'd have to be down in between. After you get it set up do a
    partition image and you can put it back running in about 5 minutes
    if you crash.
    Tomchu wrote:
    Using XP as a fileserver is equivalent to using a 4x4 Dodge RAM to pull a weed out of your garden.

    Use NT4.
    I really liked the sound of that. It sure will get
    the weed out though. It's not necessary to use
    the smallest tool just because you can.

    Thump
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • I would recommend 2000 over NT4 for a server, I've never gotten NT4 to recognize any network card.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • On the other hand, the machine I tried it on probably just had a non-kosher PCI configuration.
  • ok this is gonna be wierd but i agree with tomchu... if all he is gonna do is use it as a FTP server then he doesn't need the bloat of 2000 to do it.... and i know 2000 isn't bloated but its bigger and more reasorce consuming then 2000 is ..... if hes gonna use the server for other tasks then 2000 or XP will do nicley, but if all its gonna be is a FTP then just use NT 4... though i personally like 2000 better.
  • It will not be just a file server. It will be a file server primarily and a gaming rig on the secondly. I am thinking of putting nt4 on it first to see how it would run, then if I want more I will go with 2000 pro.
  • FTP Servers better works on FreeBSD.
    I think I don't have to explain why.
Sign In or Register to comment.