| What OS should I get? |
by hitomi |
2002-07-09 08:24:19 |
Well, Linux and such is the obvious choice... But since I play too many games, sadly, I will need to use an M$ OS. I'm formatting drive C: soon, or sticking a butter knife through it... Either way, my options are down to Win 2000 and XP Pro.
1GHz proccerssor, 256MB ram, 18 gigs of memory. I'm probably going to play some heavy games... WCIII, BGII, Neverwinternights...
Any suggestions, oh great UFies? |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
I'd say dual boot w/ Win 2k. | by ubergeek2 | 2002-07-09 08:31:10 |
|
Lindows? | by hitomi | 2002-07-09 08:40:06 |
|
It's an actual OS | by klaatu | 2006-11-19 12:23:33 |
|
OK, my HTML is broken | by klaatu | 2002-07-09 08:56:49 |
|
I would take 2000. | by aix tom | 2002-07-09 08:32:28 |
|
I have XP Home right now... | by hitomi | 2002-07-09 08:34:03 |
|
More ram | by xti | 2002-07-09 08:40:01 |
|
You forgot more ram. (n/t) | by aix tom | 2002-07-09 08:42:45 |
|
hey, I think ya need to suggest more ram too ;-) (n/t) | by packet-rat | 2002-07-09 09:17:24 |
|
If you must use 'doze, use 2k | by beez | 2002-07-09 08:41:17 |
|
If you're gaming.... | by dave_null | 2002-07-09 08:45:19 |
|
Being completely unedumicated... | by hitomi | 2002-07-09 08:46:11 |
|
It's a *nix thing | by Pic | 2002-07-09 08:48:01 |
|
Not exactly.... | by beez | 2002-07-09 08:53:08 |
|
VMWare | by dave_null | 2002-07-09 08:51:22 |
|
I agree - and maybe some more RAM, too. ;-) (n/t) | by eriq64 | 2002-07-09 11:57:50 |
|
I'm not sure... | by SteelZ | 2002-07-09 13:25:39 |
|
98 in VMWare won't work. | by Arcanum | 2002-07-09 09:43:07 |
|
I'm sorry to say this, but XP Home | by kahuana | 2002-07-09 08:47:16 |
|
ATI Tuners | by MikeCDN | 2002-07-09 15:10:10 |
|
actually i'd go with win98 and stay there (n/t) | by ma petite | 2002-07-09 09:04:24 |
|
Windows 2000 sucks for games. | by nin_man | 2002-07-09 09:13:04 |
|
Your video card problems | by Arcanum | 2002-07-09 09:41:39 |
|
Then do tell. | by nin_man | 2002-07-09 09:54:59 |
|
Dunno. | by Arcanum | 2002-07-09 10:00:47 |
|
Too slow for GLQuake and Quake2? :) | by nin_man | 2002-07-09 10:09:30 |
|
Weird. | by Arcanum | 2002-07-09 10:12:29 |
|
Must be me, I guess. | by nin_man | 2002-07-09 10:17:42 |
|
Could be. | by Arcanum | 2002-07-09 13:06:58 |
|
Eh, I oughta just get rid of the games, anyhow. | by nin_man | 2002-07-09 13:09:35 |
|
Heheheh. | by Arcanum | 2002-07-09 13:18:16 |
|
GLQuake/Quake2 are designed for 3dfx | by gblues | 2002-07-09 10:56:53 |
|
I don't think so. | by nin_man | 2002-07-09 11:05:27 |
|
Then why.. | by SteelZ | 2002-07-09 13:30:16 |
|
If it's those two only, then XP, by miles | by adiPlomat | 2002-07-09 09:15:48 |
|
my friend uses Win2k Advanced Server for all his | by i_am_pi | 2002-07-09 09:18:52 |
|
Personally, I like 2000 Pro. | by Arcanum | 2002-07-09 09:46:24 |
|
Windows 2000 | by SteelZ | 2002-07-09 13:20:52 |
|
hmmmmm | by DaNutBall | 2002-07-09 13:49:34 |
