🚀 go-pugleaf

"Thundercok" <smo...@americanisp.com> writes:

>No no no.  If you are primarily a gamer, you want Win98.  Win2000 is for
>business . . .

I must respectfully disagree.  During most of W2Ks development cycle MS
said that NT5 was to be the general replacement for both NT4 and the
windows line.  This statement was changed only near the end, when the
feature set was relatively stable.  From the start, NT5/W2K was intended
as a *general* platform.

IMHO, MicroSoft is now advertising as separate and special so as not to
kill the W98 sales and to avoid the issues of forcing the entire product
and user base to port to W2K.  As usual, they bit off more than they could
chew and are now pretending they never said the things they once said.
In this they're little different from any other large s/w company.   But
IMHO (and in my limited experience; not a big-time gamer) W2K works fine
as a gaming platform - for the games that I own happen to own and have
tried under it.

Older voodoo (v2) support is terrible, but IMHO this is a problem with
3dfx, not W2K or MS.  My G200 card works great.