Mat, here is what I have seen so far on systems running Win2000... "Mat Jarvis" <mat@...> wrote: > -Hard drive performance increased, I haven't heard anything about this - do you know about what they're doing in this area? > -Overall performance increased, Definitely not. win2K is a bloated code monster. With approx. 30 million lines of code (over double that in NT 4.0), there's just too much GUI overhead to translate into a faster OS - even if Microsoft's claims are true about a leaner kernel. > -Better stability, See above. There's a reason that the Win2K beta cycle has been one of the longest in software history, and it's NOT because Microsoft believes in total quality. They've had a huge number of problems with this release. Remember that NT 4.0 was unusable in a production network environment until Service Pack 3 - TCP/IP just plain didn't work before that patch. I don't expect MS to get it right the first few times round with Win2K either. > -Multi processor support - up to 32 in the future, Two issues here: 1. the Intel platform only supports eight CPU's in mainstream machines right now. Even then that means some very pricy server hardware. As far as I know, you can't even get a four-way box for under $10K or an eight-way for under $50K. I've also heard of serious problems (Intel-related problems) with the eight-way servers. 2. the kernel doesn't delegate processes across CPU's - it just assigns it to a single CPU. It is true that you can write code to a multiprocessing standard, but this is not a trivial matter and it GREATLY reduces code portablility if you are a developer of a cross-platform software product. > -Better support for later technologies, Firewire > etc, Adding USB, Advanced Power Management, and Plug and Pray (erm, I mean Play) support should be the most beneficial to us right away. Also, remember that Firewire is an Apple standard and Microsoft doesn't know how to play nice with others... > -Improved install, uninstall, so installs can't > write older system files > over newer > ones, the main cause of problems on Win98, This is FAR from the main cause of problems on win98. My vote would have to go to conflicting dll standards (which is related to what you said, but definitely not the same), vague registry usage and cleanup rules, neolithic kernel technology, or general code bloat due to forced Internet Explorer "integration". Given more time to think about it I could probably come up with a half dozen more critical flaws that affect stability and usability more than this. I agree that this is a step in the right direction, though. The chaos that is the Windows development platform needs to be controlled, and there's only one party that has the power to do this - Microsoft. Oh, unless they go open source. Ha ha ha. Yeah, right. > -On the fly resizing of partitions, Not really a benefit to musicians. Partition Magic already clears all this up for $50, and offers a cross-platform solution to boot. > -Better drivers, Microsoft still can't force hardware companies to write good code for their drivers. > -Certified drivers and software much harder to > achieve, so will up the > quality, Or will drive hardware developers away from the standard. The current standards are ridiculously easy to meet, and I have never encountered a company that "insists on Windows NT standard computers". > -Uses memory a lot more efficiently, so if you have > 128mb or more it will > seem as though you have more RAM installed. Haven't seen this either. Win2K itself is known to have a huge hardware requirement, to the point of making 128MB the minimum config. A lot of my clients are holding off on putting win2k on their desktops for this reason. So far, these are the only two solid advantages that win2k offers Logic win98 users: - the NT-based kernel will be more stable than the 9x kernel - support for multiple CPU's (sort of) And on another note... Tobias Woelki <riva@...> wrote: > and you don´t want to spend money for the > crossgrades? Emagic USA is only charging $50 for an OS switch. Not a big deal, really. > but i bet with you, > you must, because the next logic update comes, and > (for example) for a multi > proc system you must have a totally new sofware > programmed especially for to > use with this multiprocessor system. Do you think > logic will give us the > next big update for free? or a LA Software for a > Multiprocessorsystem also > for free? Probably not!!! Remember that BeOS and MacOSX don't need to have applications specially written for multiprocessor systems - they handle it through the OS. This is not true for Winblows. I hope that Emagic's coders don't get bogged down in writing SMP code for win2K and concentrate on getting more great features into every version. Graham __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com