GKnot using WIN98 -vs WIN2000

[cornetet]

I have access to both Win98 Second Edition & Windows 2000 Pro.

Please provide me LEGITIMATE reasons why I should use one over the other to process DivX5 encoding using GKnot.

I don't want to hear OPINIONS on using Win2000 just because its a newer OS. I only want to hear legitimate reasons why one is better than another.

Here's my system specs (I know its an older system but its my only option right now):

PII 450MHz (512kb L2 cache)
384mb of system mem (3x128mb DIMMs)
133MHz Ultra ATA IDE Controller Card
30GB Maxtor 7200rpm Ultra ATA IDE Harddrive
ATI Radeon 7500 video card with 64mb mem

> I can load either Win98 or Win2000 Pro as the OS

[theReal]

For encoding it really doesn't matter. I've been using Win98SE for a long time and it has always been good for encoding. I'm using Win2k now because I really needed the NTFS file system for capturing video and because it's more stable in case you feel like opening 50 IE Windows while encoding (in my experience opening many IE Windows is always dangerous in Win98 SE...).

Win2k could make better use of 384MB RAM than Win98, but not so much that it was a real reason to switch to Win2k. In your case, I'd rather stick with Win98SE because of the slower processor, I think.

[vinouz]

I'll definitely advise Win2K in your case.
First, given the processor....
Given a processor that can achieve 450 000 000 64bit floating point multiplications in a second, I think that's enough to handle a kernel that moves the mouse, but with a shadow under. :sly:
On a previous machine, I replaced win98 by Win2K.
It takes some 30 seconds more to load, but
- with more than 128Mb, Win98 switch between "banks" (not exactly banks, but...) of memory , which slows access to RAM. Win2K Doesn't
- Win2K takes sensibly less overhead than Win98 (You know, different kernel base [VMS -> NT -> 2K -> XP])
- Win2K is mor stable, but well, I can't say at the moment how it grows older...

BTW, the previous machine was a Celeron 500, so you can proceed with your PIII 450 ;).

The only fact is to be sure you have all the Win2K drivers for your box. If so, Proceed.

Vinouz
(I may be mistaken, but I just get angry when hearing having a 450Mhz 6th generation x86 processor might just be "too slow" for any given OS - Remember Workbench)

[U977]

Because it is finally something that can be called an OS.

Windows 98 is good for gaming, but not stable enough to be used for "work". You can run Windows 2000 during hours and days without getting a fatal error. Aplicatiosn errors are most of the time not lethal to the OS, furthermore.

Otherwise, for encoding, as said earlier, it does not matter.

With your specs, you can really afford Win2k. But some old games may not run propertly anymore under Win2k, except if you manage to do some tweaking. Maybe you can keep Win98 for games on one partition :-) Or maybe you will see that Win2k stability can also be a big advantages for games, and drop Win98.