[Dragon64]

Or in general actually

What would you all say is the best OS.

I running win98 (not SE, its an update to win95) on my machines now , but since 98 isnt supported thru WindowsUpdate any more(thanks a lot Bill, I hate you), I cant get the needed d/ls to make things work.

I am also currently building an HTPC-

ASUS TUV4X/WOA Via 694X chipset MoBo

Intel PIII 850

256 PC133 SDRAM

Sony 16x DVD

60G WD 7500rpm HDD

ATI AIW 7500 64m

SB Live Plat 5,1

D-Link 10/100 NIC

Logitech iTouch wireless optical KB and Mouse


And no matter what I do (im on my 6th OS format/reinstall) I cannot get everything to install nicely. Ive never had this much problem hooking up a PC.

I am having serious problems when I do format/re-installs. Lots of errors.


So it looks like I need to Update my OS.

What would you all say si the best one- ME or XP?

Im leaning towards XP, but its like 200$ (thanks again Bill)


Or should I just go buy a full copy of Win98SE??



Thanx for any info

 

[bb80301]

I run WinXP on my HTPC -- works fine & is compatible with all of the apps that I use. Much more reliable than Win98.


I don't think it's worth it to upgrade from 98 to ME -- they are both based on the old kernel. WinXP is based on the Win2K/NT kernel & represents the future (whether we like it or not).


I'd think that you could get an upgrade version of WinXP for way less than $200. Since you already have 98, you wouldn't need a new machine license, just an upgrade.


Regards

BB

 

[xcel]

Hi Dragon64:


___Instead of blaming MS’s Bill Gates, imagine what our SW world would be like if we were paying Ellison’s Oracle $0.15/hr of use or renting HD space on the net for $.01/MB/week? How about McNealy’s Sun charging you $3200.00 for a low end PC w/ a Gbit adapter attached? That $90.00 for XP Home looks better and better every day. Than again, you could always go with an underpowered iMAC for ~ the same price as the fastest WinTel based HTPC and lose a lot of HTPC capabilities …


___Errors are usually caused by HW and HW/SW interactions and are not inherently related to the OS itself although all OS’s still have bugs. As for Win98, it is not an HTPC OS and you really should consider upgrading after you find the faulty HW/driver. What have you set the BIOS up for as a possible help. Pull your SDRAM timings to their minimums and take a look at the voltages and temps using the BIOS based monitor. If all appears Ok, how did you format your HD? Win98 has the 64 GB limitation although MS does offer a fix (even to Win98 users) for proper Fdisk and format of a disc > 64 GB’s. Pull all your HW but the VC and install the OS from there. Are you still receiving errors on installation. If not, don’t forget the latest 4-in-1’s and patches. Why you decided on a TUV4X is another question some may ask as the VIA chipsets for Intel based CPU’s were never really considered an all around great platform.


___Finally, please remove the acronym’s related to the profanity above ASAP as they are not needed.


___Good Luck


___Wayne R. Gerdes

___Hunt Club Farms Landscaping Ltd.

___ [email protected]

 

[e vey]

Xcel,

Well said.

 

[Dragon64]

Thanks for the info guys

And sorry xcel about the profanity. I get a little miffed when I spend $$ and have serious problems. I removed it.


I actually think it might be something with my install disk. On 2 of the re-installs I got Illegal Operations during the win98 update (I start with an old version of 95 and update to 98. probably my problem right there). I then have to format and start over.

The error is with the Msgsrv32 during the final part of the 98 install.

If I do finally make it through an install, if I try to update to say IE 6 or DX 8.1, I start getting errors galore.

Its driving me nuts!

Oh and my HDD is 40G not 60, sorry. Partitioned in 1/2.


The system that I am typing on right now, and that I use for gaming is a Asus P3v4x Mobo, that uses a via chipset and Im using a Intel PIII 667 cpu with 0 problems.


Although on the other system I took 2 PC133 sdram sticks out of this system and put it in the new one. The TUV4X board is PC100, could that be causing issues??


Im at my wits end trying to get that other system to work.

I would really like an HTPC.

help me please!

 

[M.S.-Ohio]

The PC133 memory on PC100 platform is not an issue, its backward compatible. Likewise some PC100 could run @ PC133 spec w/o problems (some high quality chips, but I have seen it in many instances)


As far as an OS to use. Either Windows 2000 Workstation or Windows XP Pro would be preferred.


I have a total of 3 PC's built and 2-3 more I'm finishing for their various uses, I run Win2K on all of them, they all runs 24/7. I have yet to see the OS crash. If it did its because I was fooling with something and messed it up myself.


I have yet to use XP, but for my money, I'll take Win2000 every day of the week.

 

[Namlemez]

I like Windows 2000 for a work machine as it seems pretty streamlined. XP is 2000 with some flashiness (you can turn off.)


That being said, XP doing SPDIF out of box was very nice for me when setting up mine. All its color looks nice on a TV too (whereas I think it looks cheesy on a desk machine.)

 

[Alexander]

Quote:

Originally posted by xcel Than again, you could always go with an underpowered iMAC for ~ the same price as the fastest WinTel based HTPC and lose a lot of HTPC capabilities …

Now, was that really called for? You can get a low-end Apple tower for basically the same price, and there's nothing technical keeping it from being an HTPC. Being a niche market, HTPC apps are implemented for only one (the most popular) platform. If there wasn't all the assembly in DScaler, I'd be tempted to port it myself.


I'm a long-time Apple user, and I'm just wrapping up building my HTPC. I was admittedly shocked at the (low) price of even "high-quality" PC components, but the hassle of getting them all to work together is equally shocking. Apple's "we make the whole widget" philosophy has its advantages, and I'd have a hard time doing my everyday work on anything else.


There, that's enough Mac zealot for one day.


Alex

 

[PGPFan]

Hi Alex,


I agree with the PC prices. But you imply that the "hassle" of getting the parts working together is equally shocking. Keep in mind that the only reason that it is a hassle is the special requirements necessary for an HTPC. If you were to assemble a PC for 'everyday usage' you'd be embarassed that you paid so much for the Apple. The everyday PC has really matured to the point that they are a "piece of cake" for even my brother to assemble, and he has trouble lighting a match!


Not bashing the iMAC's, just voicing my opinion.


-PGPfan

 

[BizarroTerl]

Dragon64,

A few years ago I took a very good (and expensive) MS certification class. One of the things they stressed was "Don't upgrade - reinstall". Trying to upgrade (even upgrading a new install) is asking for trouble. I'll bet thats the root cause of all your problems. Try installing 98 on a clean drive. Obviously if you have to buy go with 2000 or xp pro.

 

[StvB]

Dragon64 -


You're not actually installing W95 and then upgrading to W98 are you??


You don't need to, you can do a clean install of W98 from the upgrade cd. Setup will just ask you to insert your W95 disk to verify your license (alternatively, you can copy the necessary files to your hd and setup won't ask for the disk - there are several websites that describe this).


Xcel is correct, leave out all the hardware except your videocard during the initial install. Once you've gotten the OS then you can start adding the hw one at a time.


PS: I've been using W98 on my HTPC for the last 2 years and haven't upgraded because, well, it does what I ask it to do. Eventually I'll upgrade, but I see no reason to now.

 

[deepcover]

I use XP, and I dont think You could pay me enough to use something else.

 

[Peter_Mann]

I own Win 95, Win 98, Win98 SE, ME, XP & 2000.

My box is run on a VIA chipset too and I have to say it is VERY stable and fast (for it's age);

PIII [email protected] (will run fine at 980MHz too, all day)

540MB PC133

ASUS P3V4X

Radeon 8500


Win 95...fergetaboutit. Bury it and put it out of it's misery.


Win98... better but old enough to have driver hassles.

It's not the old drivers that are the problem, but the coexistance of the old and the latest ( for say the mobo, videocard etc.). Some newer hardware doesn't even have drivers for Win98.


Win 98se \\ ME... virtually the same OS. MS added some bloat hid DOS and called it ME. If you do a 'lean' install of ME , minimise the number of programs you install, and get the right drivers, it is VERY stable. The main problem I have with 98se and ME is memory leakage and the eventual crash. If not for the memory leakage I'd have never upgraded to XP. Of the two, for a HTPC I'd choose Win98SE. I think that of the 9x series of Windows 98SE is the jewel in the crown. However it'll all only work well if you have the latest BIOS for your motherboard, the latest VIA 4 in 1 drivers, etc etc etc.


XP... now that some time has passed and most manufacturers have released halfway decent drivers (inc VIA and their new XP 4 in 1 set) my XP OS is currently my favorite .


2000... even better? If you have drivers for for all your hardware and software that'll support 2k then Win2000 is bullet proof.


All the manufacturers support 2k but the computer world is for better or for worse now fully focused on XP as the 'home' OS. For this reason I'm sticking with XP and just downloading the security patches as they are released. As far as a recomendation goes it would have to be XP or 2000.

I have 2k on a comp at work and it's great but seemed expensive and (at the time) not worth the hassles of upgrading from ME. Knowing what I know today, I might never have bought XP and gone 2000.


If you can get a friend to give you an old copy of 98SE they aren't using anymore that's great but I wouldn't spend money to get it. ME isn't worth money either when you can get an XP upgrade for about the same price.


I should add that I agree with the earlier posts....

Even if you buy an UPGRADE OS, you need to do a clean install if you want the best shot at stability. You'll also need the relevant Microsoft updates for ANY OS you go with. If not you are just asking for conflicts.

 

[Dragon64]

Man, the people here are great. The help is fantastic.


I was reading on the MS Knowlege base that the Msgsrv32 Illegal Op could be caused be either a bad cab file or a HW prob.

In hoping that it was my old 98 disk, I borrowed a copy of 98SE from a friend. I am now installing it. Looks like it most likely is the problems with the disk.

Although I did have a BSOD VXD prob after I had completely installed my Vid card drivers, but after I rebooted I havent gotten the error since /crosses fingers.


Im hoping all is going to work.


thanks again all. If i have probs (or even if all works out) I will let you know.

 

[Paul_Seng]

If you buy an OEM disc and license of the full blown version of XP pro it will run you about $120. It's on the internet but you have to know where to look.

 

[Mouw]

Win2k/SP2 now watched about 100 movies

NO Problems or BLUE SCREENS...


Win2000 / NT... is completely 32 bit

where as Win95/98/98se/ME are 16/32 bit so they are BackWards compatable

and they DON'T LIKE more than 512megs of RAM


Win2k u can download 1 file SERVICE PACK 2...

Fixes/Upgrades most BUGS in 1 shot

U don't have to LOGIN and wait for each UPgrade file to load separately


U can put that 1 copy of Win2k on as many machines as U like

and U don't have to phone MS everytime you want to change some

piece of HW....

 

[Alexander]

Quote:

Originally posted by PGPFan I agree with the PC prices. But you imply that the "hassle" of getting the parts working together is equally shocking. Keep in mind that the only reason that it is a hassle is the special requirements necessary for an HTPC. If you were to assemble a PC for 'everyday usage' you'd be embarassed that you paid so much for the Apple.

That's a good point about the hassle being HTPC-specific. And while I did look back with a bit of surprise at how much I paid for my current Mac, the fact remains that it's worth every penny to me. Especially with OS X and my newfound role as a Unix geek.


Alex

 

[M.S.-Ohio]

I for one would love to see OS X ported to x86. If that happened. I'd use it, no questions asked. Its a sexy OS and thats something that has always appealed to me for Mac's. But now that its got Unix underpinning it, its stable and flexible to boot.


Apple OS on x86, they say it'll never happen because if that did, Apple would die. I gotta agree, but that still don't mean I wouldn't want it on my Intel CPU


If you're into graphics design. The Motorola CPU's and Apple's OS are well suited for you. When I took graphics design in college, its all we learned on. Everywhere else had x86 machines, but the graphics lab was all Macs.


I just wish someone would light a fire under Motorola and get em to start bumping the speed of their CPU's more. Whats the top end speed? 866? Thats not satisfactory in my eyes when you got x86 cpu's doing 2.4-3.0Ghz (OC'ed).


I'm not a fan of Apple, or a zealot of Intel, both have their merits and both have their uses. I change hardware to be able to live with a pre-built machine from anyone though.


Again, for OS, its all Windows 2K in my eyes. Stable OS, good driver support, very very efficient OS compared to the 9X series.

 

[Halstead]

Quote:

Originally posted by M.S.-Ohio I just wish someone would light a fire under Motorola and get em to start bumping the speed of their CPU's more. Whats the top end speed? 866? Thats not satisfactory in my eyes when you got x86 cpu's doing 2.4-3.0Ghz (OC'ed). I'm not a fan of Apple, or a zealot of Intel, both have their merits and both have their uses. I change hardware to be able to live with a pre-built machine from anyone though. Again, for OS, its all Windows 2K in my eyes. Stable OS, good driver support, very efficient OS compared to the 9X series.

M.S.-

I'm one of those freaks that has Macs and PCs cohabitating under the same roof, and I often find myself wishing for some good HTPC-level software for my 733 G4, because the CPU is *so* much faster than my Athalon 1800 *or* my buddy's P4 2.0 for all on my graphics applications (Adobe apps, video comression, MP3 ripping, Quicktime and MPEG 1, 2 & 4 playback). Apple's machines have incredibly well integrated coprocessors for most multimedia functions, which make them about 3-4x as fast as Intel chips at the same speed.


Before the flames begin, please note that I'm not a Mac zealot- I'm writing this post on my Athalon XP 1800 and my HTPC is a PIII 933- At the end of the day I need the tweakability and PQ that you just can't get in Appleville. But make *no* mistake, the G4 is a much stronger chip that ether the P4 or the latest Athalons.


Having said all that, wouldn't the Radeon-based G4 make a great HTPC if only Apple understood the real needs of the community? It seems like it would fit in so well with their digital hub strategy.


Oh, and FYI, OS X *is* real purddy, but it still needs a bit more time in the oven. Getting close though...

 

[Karnis]

IMHO, they all work. It comes down to 2 things...do you want to play DTS CDs on your HTPC? If so you can forget about XP. Do you want interlaced resolutions? Forget about Win2K and XP.