|
|
|
Considering usining Windows2000
Showing all messages in thread #998323220
Windows 2000 Annoyances Discussion Forum
The following are all of the messages in this thread (5 in all), shown in chronological order. Click any message subject to view that message by itself or to view the thread hierarchy.
|
Considering usining Windows2000
Monday, August 20, 2001 at 9:00 am
Posted by skunky
(6 messages posted)
I have understood that 2000 is far more stable than 98SE - I understand why I would
want the full version rather than an upgrade (so I can reformat if/when I want to).
Looking on ebay, I can't figure out the difference between the oem version and the
retail version of the full pro edition - why should I care, and pay the extra money
for the retail? Anything I should know before I do this, and suggestions about where
to find it out?
Thanks,
Skunky
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Win2K OEM vs retail
Monday, August 20, 2001 at 3:46 pm
Posted by Dave
(1 messages posted)
Skunky,
I switched from Win98 to Win 2000 about 10 months ago. Win2K is much more stable.
I used to reboot 5-6 times a day with Win98 and now I only reboot once every other
day. (Win98 does not manage resources very well and Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator
and Eudora tend to make it crash often.)
I have Win2K OEM. I got one CD and one book with MS hologram. That is all that is
needed.
,dave
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Win2K OEM vs retail
Monday, August 20, 2001 at 4:17 pm
Posted by skunky
(6 messages posted)
Dave,
Thanks for the info - always good to save a little money!
Skunky
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Win2K OEM vs retail
Tuesday, August 21, 2001 at 12:12 am
Posted by Curt R
(1315 messages posted)
Retail or "box" versions of software usually pertain to what you buy out of the
store in a box. This is likely what you'ld be purchasing if you go out and buy it
at a store. In this case, OEM (original equipment manufacturer) tends to refer
to an operating system that was installed on your machine for you when you bought
it. I've been using 2000 for almost a year now without any real problems to speak
of. I was happy to switch over from 98 since I prefer the security and stability
of NT over the 9x. I couldn't really run the old NT 4.0 because it didn't like most
of my games and couldn't "see" FAT32. However, that's no longer a problem and I've
found it to be the most stable product MS has put out so far.
On Monday, August 20, 2001 at 3:46 pm, Dave wrote:
>Skunky,
>
>I switched from Win98 to Win 2000 about 10 months ago. Win2K is much more stable.
>I used to reboot 5-6 times a day with Win98 and now I only reboot once every other
>day. (Win98 does not manage resources very well and Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator
>and Eudora tend to make it crash often.)
>
>I have Win2K OEM. I got one CD and one book with MS hologram. That is all that is
>needed.
>
>
>,dave
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Considering usining Windows2000
Tuesday, August 21, 2001 at 10:14 am
Posted by fbieberdorf
(1 messages posted)
I bought the OEM version several months ago. Small manual-but so what. Check to
see if disk includes SP2-esp if on 56k--sizeable download if our disk is the original
without either SP.
my opinion
fbieberdorf@hotmail.com
On Monday, August 20, 2001 at 9:00 am, skunky wrote:
> I have understood that 2000 is far more stable than 98SE - I understand why I
would
>want the full version rather than an upgrade (so I can reformat if/when I want to).
> Looking on ebay, I can't figure out the difference between the oem version and
the
>retail version of the full pro edition - why should I care, and pay the extra money
>for the retail? Anything I should know before I do this, and suggestions about
where
>to find it out?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Skunky
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
| |
Tip: Use one of the [Reply or follow-up to this message] links above to add a message to this thread
| |
Return to the Windows 2000 Discussion Forum
|
|
|
|
