Differences between Win98 and Win2k

[SC]

Ok, I have a multi OS system with Win98 and Win2k RC1. I have a G400, 3C905B and SBLive! Value.

To avoid the lockups in Win98 I have to give each card a separate IRQ and force to AGP 1X. The G400 runs on IRQ 11, 3C905B on IRQ 10 and SBLive! Value on IRQ 5 (with SB16 Emulation disabled).

But how come that everything runs fine in Win2k RC1 the G400, 3C905B and SBLive! Value on IRQ 9 and AGP 2X?

Does Win2k handle the hardware on a totally different way than Win98 or what?

[everettes]

Yes, the two handle hardware completely differently. In a sense, Win2000 doesn't really use IRQ's the same as Win98. Which is why alot of users of 2000 see IRQ's listed above th 15 Win9x users are accustomed to. Applications in 2000 can't directly control hardware, but instead have to request the O\S to do so through the Hardware Abstraction Layer(Hal). This, correct me if I'm wrong, is part of the complications they ran into with DirectX and NT4. The kernel was never designed for an application(or API) to wield that much control over the hardware. NT, including 2000, has to grant permissions for all file and hardware access. It gets deep after that, but that's the speed version.



------------------
Reach me on MS Messenger as everettes@hotmail.com
PIII550, Intel SE440BX-2, 2 x 128 Kingston PC100 ECC, 2940U2W, Seagate Cheetah, G400-32 SH, Plextor 8\20, Plextor 40Max, Pioneer 303s, SBLive!, MS FFPro, Altec Lansing ACS-48, Sony CDP 520GS