New PC- Windows XP?!?

[monster is a cat]

I'm in the market for a new PC. Should I go for a p4/XP set-up? Will this be at all limiting in the near-term? Is it worth the cash now for the long term? What's the word on XP relative to ME/2000 etc.?

[brzilian]

If the XP drivers aren't out yet for any audio gear you use, I would say stick with Windows 2000. Windows ME is the biggest piece of crap ever put out by Microsoft and should never be used.

[billybk]

If the hardware/software you want to use is W2K compatible, from my
experience it will work with XP 99% of the time. XP is basically the next generation of W2K. I have been using XP(RC1) in my dual boot DAW for the last three months and absolutely love it. After using Win95,98 and ME, I have found XP to be the most versatile and stable OS, Microsoft has ever released. The best solution is to create a dual boot with any existing OS, which XP will do for you, as you can migrate to using XP exclusively. That way for applications and drivers that are not yet W2K/XP ready you have another OS to fall back on. I presently have a dual boot WinME/XP system,
but I find myself using XP most of the time except for the few programs that I still have to use in ME. As soon as I can though, I will be permanently dumping ME off my system and going exclusively with XP.

Billy Buck

[brzilian]

XP's new activation feature will cause problems if you change your hardware often. XP will think you have an illegal installation if you change more than 6 of your PC's components and ask you go through the online authorization again (a load of crap in my opinion). Otherwise you are left with an OS that will not function.

Some of XP netwoking capabilities are different from other MS OS's leaving it INCREDIBLY vunerable to outside hacking (Raw Socket API).

It is a rule of thumb to not use a Microsoft OS for critical applications when it is first released because even if it appears stable, you can be assured it has pleanty of new bugs, yet undiscovered.

Anything you can do in XP, you can do with Windows 2000. Win2k already has a 2 year track record and is on Service Pack #2. The only difference is the cheeezy new XP user interface (Luna). I've played around with it and wasn't impressed.

Another thing to keep in mind is that XP Home/Personal Edition does not have multiprocessor support and you have to upgrade to ZP Professional for that feature at a cost of $100.

[monster is a cat]

Thanks for the info. For what it's worth I've heard back from a Wave Digital rep and he says they've been running a win ZP Pro/P4 system with cubase vst and sonar and that the cubase setup has kicked ass but the sonar setup has yielded multiple problems without a solution as of yet. Sounds like the nice alternative would be to go with 2000 at the moment and upgrade when xp/zp has been around for a while. Later....

[brzilian]

ZP was a typo BTW. http://acapella.harmony-central.com/smile.gif Its XP Professional.

[monster is a cat]

....that's funny because the wave guy used zp as well, i (naively) thought it must be some xp jargon i'm already not familiar with. I'm such a damn american...

[l u n a s e a]

hmm...

is it true that in the Corporate Edition of XP, you wouldn't need to go through with the Activation Procedure?

-hayashi

[l u n a s e a]

hmm...

Is it true that in the Corporate Edition of XP, you wouldn't need to go through with the Activation Process?

[brzilian]

That is true, but regular customers cannot buy that version legally. It is intended for corporate use only as in when a corporation would buy multiple licenses at once.

[dino321]

Originally posted by brzilian:
If the XP drivers aren't out yet for any audio gear you use, I would say stick with Windows 2000. Windows ME is the biggest piece of crap ever put out by Microsoft and should never be used.


I've had great luck with ME. I'm running Cakewalk Pro Audio 9, Logic RPC, SoundForge, SoundDiver etc... More stable that Win98SE. It all depends on your setup. You have to turn off all the auto stuff like the "go back" feature but that's stuff you have to do for any OS on a DAW.


[This message has been edited by dino321 (edited October 19, 2001).]

[brzilian]

My problems come from my multi monitor setup. Win98/SE/ME all suck at handling that (I have friends with the same problems). Windows 2000 does it differently and I have had no problems whatsoever.

[nin4269]

I heard Win XP is really Win NT 5.0 (I hear, as yet confirmed)
I know I run a 3 headed machine w/ 4 capable on my PC at work with Win NT 4.0 no trouble at all
I think Win XP would handle multi monitor fine.

[TimOBrien]

XP? Pardon me while I do a PeeWee Herman impression:

N0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000!

[brzilian]

Originally posted by TimOBrien:
XP? Pardon me while I do a PeeWee Herman impression:

N0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000!

LOL http://acapella.harmony-central.com/smile.gifI agree!!

Anybody seen Microsoft's stupid commercial for XP yet? Madonna gos $10 million for the use of her song.

[L5S]

Go for it. It is where everything is going...

[brzilian]

Originally posted by L5S:
Go for it. It is where everything is going...

If someone else jumped off a bridge, would you?

That is basically what your doing by using XP at this point in time/

[brzilian]

Case and point:

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20011102/tc/patch_thaws_frozen_xp_laptops_1.html

You'll be seeing alot more articles like this real soon!!

[fredimac]

OK, here you go. I'm a sys admin for a small startup and I have access to all the versions of XP. Currently I'm running XP Pro on a desktop and a notebook, I upgraded both of them from fully loaded W2K OS's and they both work great so far. I don't use modems very often, so I can't speak to that. If you get a list of drivers prior to doing and upgrade you'll be OK, plus there's a utility on the CD to check system compatibility with xp. You'll get a list of software that won't work, usually they're just system components that need to be replaced.

I run Cubase 5 and Reason 1.1 on my 400MHz Celleron (just barely) but since loading XP it's the first time I've ever gotten cubase, let alone using it with Reason to work.

Here's a quick list of cool features I've found so far that are making Xp worth it to me. I will state at this ponit that MS sucks for their new licensing features and I wouldn't be suprised if they change it soon in reaction to user pressure. Send them some email at feeback@microsoft.com (I'm pretty sure that's the channel).

* XP is more stable. I've only had one crash on two systems which I upgraded (I never recommend an upgrade generally that's why I'm surpirsed)

* When it did crash, it had intelligent ways to reboot and roll drivers back.

* After the crash it offers to send but info to microsoft. I looked at it and it contains memory info and reports the OS as Windows NT 5.1

* After it sent the error report it brought me to the Windwos Crash Reporting website where I can track their work on the bug.

* The interface has more bells and whisltles that make using it easier.

* The built in Remote Desktop Sharing is the fastest and best remote control application I've never seen for a Windows OS.

These things alone make it worth it to me. I can't yet speak on the Home version, but I'm sure it's just missing some of the networking and corporate feature.

Hope it helps.

Fred

mailto:fredimac@nonchalance.org

[Nunya Bidni]

Originally posted by brzilian:
If someone else jumped off a bridge, would you?

That is basically what your doing by using XP at this point in time/



Sorry, but you're without a clue. Try actually using the OS. I've been doing DAW on a XP box since RC1. No problems, no hangs, no crashes. Don't buy into the voodoo spread around by people who think they're technicians because they read newsgroups.

[brzilian]

Originally posted by Nunya Bidni:
Sorry, but you're without a clue. Try actually using the OS. I've been doing DAW on a XP box since RC1. No problems, no hangs, no crashes. Don't buy into the voodoo spread around by people who think they're technicians because they read newsgroups.

Sorry pal, you assume too much. I actually have a background in Computer Engineering and do IT work on a daily basis.

Lets see, I was using Chicago back in 94 (that was the Windows 95 beta in case you didn't know), Windows NT 4.0 beta way before it came out (even used the UI beta update for NT 3.51) and Linux Salckware before it made news headlines. I have done my share of fooling around with XP as well.

The truth is if you are tired of working in 9x, there is no significant reason to spend $200-300 on a piece of crap like XP when Windows 2000 will work just fine and has been around for a much longer period of time.

It's called "common sense". Want me to explain that term to you?

[Nunya Bidni]

Originally posted by brzilian:
Sorry pal, you assume too much. I actually have a background in Computer Engineering and do IT work on a daily basis.

Lets see, I was using Chicago back in 94 (that was the Windows 95 beta in case you didn't know), Windows NT 4.0 beta way before it came out (even used the UI beta update for NT 3.51) and Linux Salckware before it made news headlines. I have done my share of fooling around with XP as well.

The truth is if you are tired of working in 9x, there is no significant reason to spend $200-300 on a piece of crap like XP when Windows 2000 will work just fine and has been around for a much longer period of time.

It's called "common sense". Want me to explain that term to you?

BFD, so you played with a Windows 95 beta. Who didn't?

I think you'd be better off jumping off your arrogant, condescending soapbox when you're posting to people that have been doing this stuff for much longer than you have. Develop a little common sense of your own and actually work with the OS, rather than just "fooling around" with it.

Why would a user spend $100 (not $200, again, do your homework before you blather) upgrading from 9x to XP? Stability. That alone is worth it. Why not 2K? Compare the HCLs.

[brzilian]

Originally posted by Nunya Bidni:
BFD, so you played with a Windows 95 beta. Who didn't?

I think you'd be better off jumping off your arrogant, condescending soapbox when you're posting to people that have been doing this stuff for much longer than you have. Develop a little common sense of your own and actually work with the OS, rather than just "fooling around" with it.

Why would a user spend $100 (not $200, again, do your homework before you blather) upgrading from 9x to XP? Stability. That alone is worth it. Why not 2K? Compare the HCLs.

Please don't make a fool of yourself by putting reliability/stability and Windows in the same sentence. Ever hear of the US Navy submarine that was outfitted with Windows NT?

And by fooling around, I mean understaing what goes on uner the hood. Ever take the time to understand what the Raw Socket API vunerabilites are in Windows XP?

Ever stop to think what the legal implications will be from now on about Microsoft's new licensing and product activation policies?


[This message has been edited by brzilian (edited November 13, 2001).]

[Nunya Bidni]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by brzilian:
Please don't make a fool of yourself by putting reliability/stability and Windows in the same sentence. Ever hear of the US Navy submarine that was outfitted with Windows NT?

Nice strawman. Next?


And by fooling around, I mean understaing what goes on uner the hood. Ever take the time to understand what the Raw Socket API vunerabilites are in Windows XP?


Read about 'em. Non-issue to me. Non-issue to a lot of users, really.



Ever stop to think what the legal implications will be from now on about Microsoft's new licensing and product activation policies?


Sure. Who's going to change it? You?

[brzilian]

>>Sure. Who's going to change it? You?<<

I'm gonna damn well try. That is why I chose to become an Industrial Designer. There is always the opportunity to improve the quality of life and innovate with new ideas. From the shoes you wear to the car you drive, Indsutrial Designers had a part in making it look/work the way it does. Just take a look at my profile to see what I've done so far.

Hey man, do whatever floats your boat. Run XP, whatever.

Just keep me in mind when you are called by the people you support when the next Nimda/Code Red virus comes your way or when Microsoft decides you have to pay a monthly fee to use their OS's.

I've said what I need to say. You don't have to worry about seeing my posts in this thread anymore.

[This message has been edited by brzilian (edited November 13, 2001).]

[vitocorleone]

If you can wait until the first service pack before getting XP, do it. I didn't want to wait and I "upgraded" from a flaky win2k pro installation to XP Home. Now that I've been using it for 2 weeks, I'd have to say that - despite MSFTs product activation and not-so-subtle ways to get you to sign up for Passport services etc. - that I'm impressed. I've had ZERO problems and install was a snap. And, unlike in win2kpro, i can run my Mia and SBLive! at the same time with zero problems (same setup, it just works now - nothing was changed except the OS). if you don't like the UI, you can either tweak it (visit www.tweakxp.com (http://www.tweakxp.com) for starters) or revert back to the ol' win2k UI. overall, it's a more usable product (i'm a professional UI designer and usability engineer). that, and my music hardware/apps seem to love.

if you do go winxp, be aware that as soon as you install, there is ~20mb in updates to download. just take the usual precautions when using msft apps (have a backup by using something like Ghost), antivirus, defrag, firewall(s), etc. and you'll be fine.

e.g., WinXP is not a piece of crap.

[qtuner]

Originally posted by brzilian:
XP's new activation feature will cause problems if you change your hardware often. XP will think you have an illegal installation if you change more than 6 of your PC's components and ask you go through the online authorization again (a load of crap in my opinion). Otherwise you are left with an OS that will not function.

Some of XP netwoking capabilities are different from other MS OS's leaving it INCREDIBLY vunerable to outside hacking (Raw Socket API).

It is a rule of thumb to not use a Microsoft OS for critical applications when it is first released because even if it appears stable, you can be assured it has pleanty of new bugs, yet undiscovered.

Anything you can do in XP, you can do with Windows 2000. Win2k already has a 2 year track record and is on Service Pack #2. The only difference is the cheeezy new XP user interface (Luna). I've played around with it and wasn't impressed.

Another thing to keep in mind is that XP Home/Personal Edition does not have multiprocessor support and you have to upgrade to ZP Professional for that feature at a cost of $100.

I dare you to explain intelligently how a raw socket implementation makes XP less secure. I also like how you point out that win2k is stable, but XP which is built on the same kernel is unstable. The same was said about win2k in the beginning, but it has proven to be stable too.

The only valid point this post makes is cost for multiprocessor support. However, in my opinion, multiprocessor support is a misnomer. In audio applications you're better off with spending the money on a faster processor.

Valid reasons for not choosing XP are lack of driver support and cost.
I am sick of platform biggotry on this forum. We're all looking for a good platform to run a DAW on this forum. We want tools that don't get in the way of making music. Lets focus on finding the best tools for making music instead of trying to push our own personal agenda.

[brzilian]

Originally posted by qtuner:
I dare you to explain intelligently how a raw socket implementation makes XP less secure. I also like how you point out that win2k is stable, but XP which is built on the same kernel is unstable. The same was said about win2k in the beginning, but it has proven to be stable too.

I don't need to go into details (you can read the link), but MS has pretty much provided the same functionality built into XP as the Back Orifice program used by hackers to hack into Microsoft OS's. When was the last time it made sense for a SysAdmin to give every user on a network full administrative priviledges?

http://grc.com/dos/winxp.htm

Windows 2000 -> Service Pack 2 and 2 year track record of real world use

Windows XP -> based on Win2k -> more improvements/features added -> more logistical reasons for programmer error, i.e "bugs" and no service pack release to date because of lack of "real world" testing of final code (has only been released for 1 month).

[qtuner]

Originally posted by brzilian:
I don't need to go into details (you can read the link), but MS has pretty much provided the same functionality built into XP as the Back Orifice program used by hackers to hack into Microsoft OS's. When was the last time it made sense for a SysAdmin to give every user on a network full administrative priviledges?

So you punted to a website that doesn't answer my question. So if a hacker has hacked my computer doesn't he have control of the computer anyway. Can't he put what ever he wants including his own socket implementation on the machine? Also, have you noticed how now that XP is out the internet has broken(referring to your website)? And what does giving full admin access to users have anythig to do with a sockets implementation?


Windows 2000 -> Service Pack 2 and 2 year track record of real world use

Windows XP -> based on Win2k -> more improvements/features added -> more logistical reasons for programmer error, i.e "bugs" and no service pack release to date because of lack of "real world" testing of final code (has only been released for 1 month).

How many millions of Beta testers were there for XP. I know 100's of people. Yes 100's, that have been using beta versions of xp for the last 10 months. I Started using XP when Beta 2 came out. Have you noticed in XP how it asks for feedback and to send error reports when something goes wrong? Have you actually used XP?

I think the biggest benefit of XP to a DAW user is the fact that it can roll back drivers. The biggest problem I have had with my DAW are the drivers. Now if companies would get the drivers out the door sooner we'd be good, but I know it isn't easy writting drivers for Windows. You probably know this too seeing as how you're an experienced hacker, and have a lot of experience with low level programming, assembly and kernel mode debugging.

Just to be clear. I use win2k for my DAW because the lack of driver support. I am not saying win2k is a lesser OS. I just don't think your claims are justified.

[brzilian]

Originally posted by qtuner:
So you punted to a website that doesn't answer my question. So if a hacker has hacked my computer doesn't he have control of the computer anyway. Can't he put what ever he wants including his own socket implementation on the machine? Also, have you noticed how now that XP is out the internet has broken(referring to your website)? And what does giving full admin access to users have anythig to do with a sockets implementation?



A Hacker has control of your TCP/IP layer of the OS, but cannot go any further (in any OS but XP). Only Microsoft had the brilliant idea to let their ActiveX API make system calls to the OS (the source of all problems with Outlook) and now introduce RAW Socket API's (which do the same thing basically). Now in addition to having full access to your system, a hacker can use your computer as a launch point for attacks on others because he can conceal the source of the attack by creating false IP addresses, etc...

Originally posted by qtuner:
How many millions of Beta testers were there for XP. I know 100's of people. Yes 100's, that have been using beta versions of xp for the last 10 months. I Started using XP when Beta 2 came out. Have you noticed in XP how it asks for feedback and to send error reports when something goes wrong? Have you actually used XP?




Yep, been testing it for a while (with a dual boot setup because I do not trust it yet). Already ran into issues with SB Live! drivers and loss of functionality in Home Studio 2002/Sonar. I'm pretty much beating the crap out of it to see what happens - already got it to freeze up on me.

Sure there has been a beta testing program, BUT I am talking about real world testing of the **FINAL** code, i.e. the build used for production. There is no such thing as error free code (spent 2 years taking CS courses while in Computer Engineering so I know how that stuff works) and how many more bugs do you think were introduced by fixing code in the beta program?

All I'm saying is let time take is course before putting XP on some kind of pedestal.


[This message has been edited by brzilian (edited November 23, 2001).]