SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : NetCurrents NTCS -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: rocklobster who wrote (6735)4/1/2001 5:11:23 PM
From: Andriy Turhovach  Respond to of 8925
 
rocklobster -- Win 2000 is NOT the same as Windows ME. In fact, If it was a choice between WIN ME and WIN 98, I'd stick to WIN 98, but THE choice for stability, security, and performance is WIN 2000, all IMHO of course.

"What do you mean you formatted your hard drive? did you erase everything that it came loaded with" Yes, that's exactly right. There was too much other "junk" on there that I didn't want, and simply erasing programs doesn't quite do the job. I wanted a completely clean install. But that's me, I'm kinda finicky about these things.

With regard to graphics cards. If you don't go the multi-monitor route, ATI and NVDA are the two main players. NVDA seems to be the current leader, and that 64MB card you're talking about is, to use an outworn cliche, simply awesome. By the way, I did find out something interesting, much to my chagrin. The new Intel P4 motherboard does not support Appian Graphics AGP cards. Bummer. I had purchased one (the Jeronimo 2000, I think) and it doesn't fit in the AGP slot. ATI and Matrox both make graphic cards that do fit, but alas, WIN 2000 doesn't currently support the multimonitor function the way I'd like it -- that is, all you get is an extended desktop. not individual desktops like you can with, say dual PCI cards, on WIN 98. I talked to ATI and Appian, and both claim they are working on a solution, but could offer no ETA date.