SP3 probably wont improve performance anyway...
probably just a waste of time.
Ubuntu FTW!!
oh god another noobuntu wanker...............
go away please, noobuntu is one of the worst versions of linux around if your above the level of "durrrr how do i send somebody an internet with pictures"
blah......
64bit Win2k and Win98 sound nice.
I'd use em both.
Problem with Win98SE today is not bugs (many were fixed in unofficial service packs put together by users themselves) it's the lack of drivers. Last nVidia platform to support Win9x was nForce3. There is nothing special about Win9x architecture that requires more complex drivers than NT platforms (NT/2k/XP). I see Microsoft's hand in this. Win98SE would be perfect for low spec, low power laptops like EeePC or something even slower. It would eat far less resources than any stripped down version of XP or Linux and it would be easier on the battery life.
9x was SHIT, and IS SHIT, period, get over it, you people who insist that 9x was "the best gaming windows ever" just didnt know how to install 2k or didnt have the hardware for it.......
yeah, ms in involved, they dumped 98 because effectivly its dos(8bit) with a hodgepodge of 16 and 32bit crap slaped on top of it, really if computers had been powerfull enought at the time MS would probbly have just moved everybody to an NT core insted of putting out more dos based junk.
eeePc's would be better off running vector linux, i know u hate linux and feel its dead in the water, but in this case, vector would be perfect, i have vector on an OLD ASS hp 6535 system , thats a celeron466 with 512mb pc66 ram and an 8gb hdd, and onboard intel 810 chipset video, guess what, its as fast as my dual core a64@2.6gz with 1066 ram, its insain, oh yeah, and the 4 lappys i have installed with vector soho all gained bat life over the 9x based crap they orignaly had(98/me) as well as modern software support(something 9x lost many years ago....)
theres a 64bit version of 2000, its one of the server versions, also XP 64 isnt XP at all its Server 2003, get SP1 for it
no its sp2, server 2003/x64pro are both on sp2 now, as to 64bit 2k, there was an INTEL ONLY 64bit 2k as well as a build for Alpha cpu's but thats it, both builds are now pretty much useless for anything that u can get/use today.
the reasion x64pro is so much more stable then xp32 is because ITS NOT BASED ON XP, its based on server 2003 that had over a year extra dev time put into it, ms couldnt put out "xp server" because xp honestly wasnt even close to stable/reliable enought to work as a server, xp was when ms "fell off the hampster wheel" as i think of it, they put out the desktop os over a year b4 its server side was ready, this ment that they had to update them sepratly.
look at 2k, with 2k you never saw patches/hotfixes that broke drivers or app support, because you CANT just slap out updates for a server platform, you gotta test them first, and make sure they dont fubar the server side, and since 2k pro is just 2k server in a desktop mode insted of server mode, it got better support.
nt3/4/5(2k) all avoided ALOT of issues by keeping the desktop and server os on the same level, thats what ms is trying to do with vista now, sp1 updated the kernal but from what i have read it wasnt perfect even in ms's eyes, some updates for server wont work for vista, so they gotta spend more man hours on updates for vista, had they just been smart and waited a year to put vista out, got the buggs worked out, got server ready, they could have IMHO made a killing, vista=the bullshit and buggs would have been a hell of alot better then what we got..........
windows7 is set to put out server and workstation/desktop versions at the same time back with the old nt/2k model, so IF they dont fuk it up, we hopefully will see a decent os this next time around insted of paying to betatest ms's latist os.
thanks!![[I.R.A]_FBi](https://tpucdn.com/forums/data/avatars/l/39/39344.jpg?1384761935){kind=avatar}