Windows 2000 Service Pack 3 Fix List

[The PIT]

Pity I can't find the link where they tested winxp and win2k side by side and found winxp slower in all cases. However whether the end user would notice is debatable.
At home I've got both win2k and Xp and Xp boots far faster than win2k while at work the situtation is reversed. Xp is the only os that does silly things like forgets it's network sharing or suddenly decides not to boot up on very rare occasions.

[Dr Mordrid]

Calm down GURM....you're overheating....

I DO know how to turn off the Lego interface AND how to install and configure an OS. That doesn't make it work any better, it just looks different. In other words: cosmetic change.

I also have several very fast systems, thank you. In fact the PIII-850/RT-2000 system is my second to SLOWEST system at the moment.

As for the IEEE-1394 issue, complaints about patchy IEEE-1394 support has been on both the MSPro and Premiere support sites. The only issue is: who caused it? I think Microsoft, but we can disagree until M$ releases its fix in SP-1

My lower R/W's in XP are NOT with VIA gear...this was on an Intel system with a 4 channel RAID capable of over 90 mb/s writes in NTFS using IBM 75GXP's. Granted, the difference was only a few percent...but it showed up in the RT2K's HDBenchmark and SANDRA.

As for my definition of it as "cheesy"....what else would you call something that has come to be known in the pop culture as "the Lego interface" and not the "Rembrandt interface"? Sounds cheesy to me.

As for the copy protection & support stuff not being spyware, that depends on your definition. That it can crawl around my system and report back what's installed in order for me to D/L upgrades meets my definition.

Dr. Mordrid

[Gurm]

Calm down GURM....you're overheating....

Yes yes. As always. Right.

I DO know how to turn off the Lego interface AND how to install and configure an OS. That doesn't make it work any better, it just looks different. In other words: cosmetic change.

If you disable the service, it runs EXACTLY like Win2k. Not a cosmetic change.

As for the IEEE-1394 issue, complaints about patchy IEEE-1394 support has been on both the MSPro and Premiere support sites. The only issue is: who caused it? I think Microsoft, but we can disagree until M$ releases its fix in SP-1

*shrug* 1394 is NOT strictly adhered to. I have seen many a FireWire card that doesn't work in some way or another. Why, for example, would the FireWire card determine what kind of AVI files can be transferred from the camera? But it does (bizarre, hotly debated over at the Adobe forums). I wouldn't be so hasty to pin the blame on MS.

My lower R/W's in XP are NOT with VIA gear...this was on an Intel system with a 4 channel RAID capable of over 90 mb/s writes in NTFS using IBM 75GXP's. Granted, the difference was only a few percent...but it showed up in the RT2K's HDBenchmark and SANDRA.

My RAID (also 75GXP's) "appears" to run slower under WinXP as well with Sandra and HDBenchmark. There are very few disk benchmarks that give out accurate numbers under WinXP.

As for my definition of it as "cheesy"....what else would you call something that has come to be known in the pop culture as "the Lego interface" and not the "Rembrandt interface"? Sounds cheesy to me.

And all the college CS geeks call Macintosh "Crackintosh", but what's your point? The interface wasn't made for you and me, it was made for my mom... who loves it.

As for the copy protection & support stuff not being spyware, that depends on your definition. That it can crawl around my system and report back what's installed in order for me to D/L upgrades meets my definition.

You're confused about this. NOTHING gets sent back to Microsoft from Windows Update. NOTHING. You download a program which figures out what to install, then requests the files from MS. They don't get a single byte in return.

Activation, on the other hand, DOES send them something. 11 whole bytes of hashed data representing a numeric breakdown of key hardware in your system. 11 bytes. WAH!

- Gurm

[agallag]

Thanks to my company's select agreement, I got a copy w/o all that activation crap. It's quite nice to not have to bother with it.

Really, my only gripe with XP right now is that I can't figure out how to disable "preview" as the default double-click action on image files. When I open an image, I want it to come up in ACDSee, not in the stupid XP viewer. For now I have to right click and select "open" in order for it to open in ACDSee. Any of you guys know how to change that?

Edit: nevermind, found the answer. Do as follows if this ticks you off too.

Right Click On image file.
Choose "open with", then "choose program"
Select your favorite image viewer program.
Check the "always use selected program" box
Click OK.

That changes the default action from "preview" to "open". Why wouldn't they just let you do that the old fashioned way by going into the file types dialog and editing the properties?

[Indiana]

The Doc and Technoid perfectly made my point.

I DO know how to completely turn off that crazy ugly XP interfaces and disables all those extra (but with no extra functionality to the average user) services, and still XP is slower than 2k, it responds slower, it has slower HD access (no, not Sandra, even though this is not worse than HDTach), but you DO notice it when you're doing vidcaps! And for the GUI, believe me, it's slower (I have used an Amiga for long enough and am still using it to notice the "responsiveness" of an OS). If you don't care about this, O.K. But then there are lots of people that are saying that todays cards are fast enough in 2D and not notice how the KyroII (the G450 as well) suck at it....

I have a RadeonDDR and a Radeon8500 besides my G400 and I KNOW that ATIs WinXP drivers are worse than the 2k ones. Go look at Rage3D or another ATI forum, even there peole tend to agree that ATI and XP is a somewhat unmature combination.

For the application compatibilty, there are some multimedia apps (esp. vid-capturing) that don't behave very well under XP (why do you think the Doc hates XP so much...), I have an old DOS software for physicians that does work under 2k, but won't really well under XP - well, it works, but the screen is flickering as hell (on a NVidia card). And where are the drivers for Matrox' capture products for WinXP? So you can add Matrox and Nvidia to the not really well supported hardware on WinXP (Besides ATI, Creative,..) Not much left there.

And to the networking: as I can't really reproduce your other claims (faster, more stable) I WILL put it as a claim and not as fact. But I forgot, what you're saying is fact, because you can find some people to back it up, even though there are as many that are stating the exact opposite (just look at the opinions in this thread)....

So it at least seems to depend on the individual system, but you just CANNOT generally claim that WinXP is faster than 2k.

P.S.: Wasn't there quite the same "battle" between Win98 and ME "supporters" some time ago?

[Wombat]

P.S.: Wasn't there quite the same "battle" between Win98 and ME "supporters" some time ago?

No, it was pretty much Jorden vs. everybody.

[Dr Mordrid]

Yup...and I'll state openly that it IS us video editors who are the most sensitive to the responsiveness of an OS.

Better yet; test it yourself by working with Premiere6 for a couple of hours is

Dr. Mordrid

[Rags]

I would love to see your nfo to see what processes you have running in XP. After my customizing XP reacts nicer with multiple windows. And if you think someone using VS6 isn't sensitive to responsiveness of an OS, then you are crazy.

But then again, some people think eDualhead needs to be installed to get independent monitors in Win2K *shrug*

Rags