Microsoft Hidden Folders

[scruge]

yeah, you can delete the folders.

I've been running w2k for nearly 2 years and have never seen a blue screen or a locked system.
When one considers w2k has been out nearly 4 years now and the updates have amounted to as little as they have, its a pretty stable OS. I don't know where the 400meg figure is coming from because I just installed w2k on another system just 5 days ago and I know it didn't take longer than 2 hours to have it completely updated including IE6, DirectX, WMP and some drivers over a TI connection.
I can't imagine anyone still using an OS older than winME. Unless they just like to chat, email and do some light accounting.

With video being the next big growth area for PCs a person is going to have to consider switching to a NT OS. 4GB file sizes don't cut it when you consider NTFS handles up to 1000GB files. Then to compound the problem further non-NT OSs only support 512mb of memory.
Try downloading your DV camcorder to a non-NT OS and find out what happens after 11minutes of video transfer, the system stops and reports you've reached the max file size.

[Leech_Killer]

Originally posted by Yusuke+15 February 2003 - 08:31--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Yusuke @ 15 February 2003 - 08:31)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Leech_Killer@14 February 2003 - 06:54
XP Pro is definitely a lot more stable than 2K, 2K started out life as NT5 but with the millennium just around the corner Microsoft renamed it. It was supposed to be a joining of the NT4 base software and 98/ME, but all they managed to was have a common OS with all of the bugs from both. To date XP Pro is the best they’ve so far come up with, it still has bugs in it but far less than the previous OS’s they’ve produced.

Win2k was never sposed to be a merger of 9x and the NT kernel... That&#39;s more along the lines of what M&#036; is touting XP as being...
Win2k is just an update to NT4, hence why it&#39;s called NT5 and XP is called NT5.1, so it&#39;s really not a merger of 9x and the NT kernel either, is just a little update to Win2k (much like ME was to 98)[/b][/quote]
Windows 2000 IS a merger of NT and 98 if you don&#39;t believe me then check out the link to Microsoft&#39;s own website.

Windows 2000 Professional Overview

[Yusuke]

All that page says about Win98 is this:

Built on Windows NT® technology and the easy-to-use, familiar Windows® 98 user interface, Windows 2000 Professional gives business users increased flexibility

And all that is saying is that it has the look of Win98&#39;s interface, not that it&#39;s any kinda of merger with 98...

Win2k is just an update to NT 4 to make it more user friendly, much like XP is an update to Win2k to make it even more user friendly....


Have you even used Win2k though?? If not, try using it than you&#39;ll see for yourself...

[TheLabel]

In the Windows family, I would say XP Pro is the best and most stable. It is extremely stable, has a nice interface, and is very customizable and flexible. I have been using XP Pro for 7 months or so now and it has never blue screened or crashed. Usually the only time it needs to restart is when you have updated windows. Very nice OS overall.

[Leech_Killer]

Originally posted by Yusuke@18 February 2003 - 05:44
Have you even used Win2k though??&nbsp; If not, try using it than you&#39;ll see for yourself...

Have I ever used it, well in 1997/1998 I worked for a software house. We&#39;d won a contract from Microsoft to do work on NT5 Beta 1/2. You keep telling me that 2K isn&#39;t a merger of codes, but having worked for a company that helped write it I know for a fact that it is. 2K was built on the NT4 code base to utilies it&#39;s multi-tasking abilities but also had major improvements in reliability, ease of use, increased Internet compatibilities, mobile computing support, Plug and Play, advanced networking, USB devices, IEEE 1394 devices and infrared devices, most of which were taken from 98. Even Microsoft isn&#39;t foolish enough to re-write codes that they already have that are working. If 2K is just the next step on from NT why has there been so many problems between the two, an example of this is has always being when trying to get a NT machine to handshake with a 2K server, it&#39;s a right pain in the arse to set it up correctly. You said yourself that it has the look of Win98&#39;s interface, how do you think it got that look without using the same codes.

[imported_uncle_cracker]

Originally posted by Soul814@13 February 2003 - 00:58
98se has the least bugs... itz like supposedly "the perfect windows" althought itz like really old now....

absolutely right about win98se

cu

[imported_computerfreak76]

i think all of you out there that are dissing windows xp either dont have it or just dont know how to use it. comparing win98 to winxp is like comparing a ford or chevy to a lexus or its like comparing a tv dinner to a nice steak dinner.

yeah a ford or chevy will do what you need it to do but with the lexus your riding in style and comfort and class.

a tv dinner will fill you up but leaves you longing for more.the steak dinner satisfies.

so for all you idiots out there trying to compare win98 to winxp shut the fuck up because the majority rules here&#33;

[Yusuke]

Originally posted by Leech_Killer+18 February 2003 - 07:57--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Leech_Killer @ 18 February 2003 - 07:57)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Yusuke@18 February 2003 - 05:44
Have you even used Win2k though??&nbsp; If not, try using it than you&#39;ll see for yourself...

Have I ever used it, well in 1997/1998 I worked for a software house. We&#39;d won a contract from Microsoft to do work on NT5 Beta 1/2. You keep telling me that 2K isn&#39;t a merger of codes, but having worked for a company that helped write it I know for a fact that it is. 2K was built on the NT4 code base to utilies it&#39;s multi-tasking abilities but also had major improvements in reliability, ease of use, increased Internet compatibilities, mobile computing support, Plug and Play, advanced networking, USB devices, IEEE 1394 devices and infrared devices, most of which were taken from 98. Even Microsoft isn&#39;t foolish enough to re-write codes that they already have that are working. If 2K is just the next step on from NT why has there been so many problems between the two, an example of this is has always being when trying to get a NT machine to handshake with a 2K server, it&#39;s a right pain in the arse to set it up correctly. You said yourself that it has the look of Win98&#39;s interface, how do you think it got that look without using the same codes. [/b][/quote]
I know about all them things that got added to 2k
But just because 2k utilizes alot of them things that are from Win98 doesn&#39;t necessarily mean it was a code merger that made it possible... I&#39;m sure the M&#036; programmers are smart enough to write the same functionality into 2k from scratch and make it better than it was in Win98..

But oh well, I&#39;m really gettin tired of going on and on and on with you about this....

[ripley02]

just posting so can track cuz theres a lot of hidden stuff on this used pc.

[Supernatural]

Originally posted by computerfreak76@18 February 2003 - 08:16
i think all of you out there that are dissing windows xp either dont have it or just dont know how to use it. comparing win98 to winxp is like comparing a ford or chevy to a lexus or its like comparing a tv dinner to a nice steak dinner.

yeah a ford or chevy will do what you need it to do but with the lexus your riding in style and comfort and class.

a tv dinner will fill you up but leaves you longing for more.the steak dinner satisfies.

so for all you idiots out there trying to compare win98 to winxp shut the fuck up because the majority rules here&#33;

EXACTLY&#33; Comparing 98 to XP? And not even comparing.. actually saying 98 is better than XP&#33; WTF?&#33;?&#33;?&#33;