Art wrote:
>Does Win 2K require a 133mHz motherboard bus? Can WIN 2K run on a
>Celeron system CPU which uses a 66mHz bus?
Does anyone know why a bunch of list messages have been resent? I've just
seen several duplicates. :-7
BTW I just used a PC today which had 96MB of RAM and a Pentium 200MM
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ezio
> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 11:19 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
> W98SE?
>
>
> Frank, I
: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
W98SE?
> ME is a slight tweak of Windows 98 and hasn't much to do with Windows
> 2000. They share a new unified device driver model, but that merely means
> that you are less likely to find hardware that works on both at t
m e-photography site
- Original Message -
From: "Frank Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 6:49 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
W98SE?
> Because Windows 2000 IS robust down to
"Frank Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Rob wrote:
> > It's a better OS overall. MS want to get everyone over into the
NT/Win2K
> > environment so that can kill off Win9x/ME.
> No. They are working on a version of Windows that has a common base from
> which they can spin off various scaled ver
Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...) wrote:
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
>>
>> Don't you mean "it turns out to be real... expensive... to get that spec
>> out of it ;-)
>>
>> I wasn't planning on spending the cost of the scanner a second time to
>> get it to run
ME is a slight tweak of Windows 98 and hasn't much to do with Windows
2000. They share a new unified device driver model, but that merely means
that you are less likely to find hardware that works on both at the moment
:-(
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
> In a message dated 03/08/2001 6:42:42 PM
mList?u=62684
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ezio
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 8:22 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
> W98SE?
>
>
&g
iginal Message -
From: "Frank Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 6:56 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
W98SE?
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL P
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
> > Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 2:56 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 2:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
> W98SE?
>
>
>
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
>
> Don't you mean "it turns out to be real... expensive... to get that spec
> out of it ;-)
>
> I wasn't planning on spending the cost of the scanner a second time to
> get it to run at the speced speed, by having to buy a 933MHz processor
>
Quoton wrote:
> If your mainboard is 133MHz capable you really should take all the
> advantage of it now. My Minolta scanner took nearly 2 minutes to scan
> a 35mm frame at full resolution on my pC-100 system (dual 550MHz CPU,
> 512MB PC-100 SDRAM) but with my newly assembled 933MHz single CPU
Ed wrote:
> I don't run a business or NT workstations and already run WinMe, which to
my
> understanding is the consumer version of Windows 2000 Professional.
No, the two products aren't really related that way. ME is an upgrade of
Win98SE,
and Win2K is an upgrade of NT4.
> My point was that ma
At 21:28 9/03/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>When I installed Win2K I found that it detected my modem and installed
>the driver of the modem itself. I thought I might need to turn my house
>upside down to find my modem driver diskette. So Win2K might actually has
>all the drivers included for you not so
Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
> My Mainboard is 133 bus, but at the time I bought it and put my system
> together Celerons were the best deal. I'll probably upgrade to a
> Pentium III soon, and upgrade some of the memory which is PC 100 (some
> is PC133) to PC 133. When I do that I might move to W
; [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bob Shomler
> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 7:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
> W98SE?
>
>
> >2) It will use as much RAM as you can pack on a board. Windows 98 an
> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 7:47 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
> W98SE?
>
>
> Frank writes ...
>
> > Photoshop is really not a consumer-level product,
> > and truly does benefit from Windows 2
Quoton wrote:
> No problem with my old machine with PC-100 memory. I don't believe it will
> have any problem with PC-66 systems. But honestly Pc-66 systems are very SLOW
> comparing to PC-133 systems.
>
> Quoton
My Mainboard is 133 bus, but at the time I bought it and put my system
togethe
Frank writes ...
> Photoshop is really not a consumer-level product,
> and truly does benefit from Windows 2000.
> ...
According to threads at the Adobe forum, this fact is highly
dependent on how well Win2k runs with your hardware drivers, and
marginal at best. Win98se is better suppor
>2) It will use as much RAM as you can pack on a board. Windows 98 and ME
>can't really use more RAM than about 256M effectively, but W2K can go all
>the way :-)
Can you elaborate on win98's inability to use larger RAM (or refer me to some
discussion on this)?
Thanks.
--
Bob Shomler
http://
Rob Geraghty wrote:
> Art wrote:
>
>> Does Win 2K require a 133mHz motherboard bus? Can WIN 2K run on a
>> Celeron system CPU which uses a 66mHz bus?
>
>
> Win2K doesn't require any particular bus speed. It's just a Microsoft recommendation
> - making sure you buy upgrades from their frie
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 5:25 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
> W98SE?
> I
In a message dated 03/08/2001 6:42:42 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< "Top 10 Reasons to Move to Windows 2000 Professional":
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/professional/solutions/toptenupgr
ade.asp >>
I don't run a business or NT workstations and already run
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
> In a message dated 03/07/2001 6:42:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << Just in case it hasn't been stated clearly, Win98SE, WinME and Win2K
> all
> use the same colour management system.
>
> Rob >>
>
>
> I was just getting ready t
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
W98SE?
| Ed wrote:
| >I was just getting ready to run out and spend $350 (?) on Win2K when I
|
| >already have WinMe. What are the advantages to the 2K "pro" version
|
Ed wrote:
>I was just getting ready to run out and spend $350 (?) on Win2K when I
>already have WinMe. What are the advantages to the 2K "pro" version
> besides the letters on the box? And who is it useful to?
o Better memory management
o less likely to crash (NT/Win2K has a much more stable k
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
> W98SE?
>
>
> My understanding is that Win2K is a replacement upgrade for Win NT. It
lmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
W98SE?
Which would be a reason for dual-boot systems, of course.
Maris
- Original Message -
From: "Laurie Solomon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 2:18 PM
Subject
Which would be a reason for dual-boot systems, of course.
Maris
- Original Message -
From: "Laurie Solomon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 2:18 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage co
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 10:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
W98SE?
In a message dated 03/07/2001 6:42:23 PM Eastern
In a message dated 03/07/2001 6:42:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Just in case it hasn't been stated clearly, Win98SE, WinME and Win2K all
use the same colour management system.
Rob >>
I was just getting ready to run out and spend $350 (?) on Win2K when I
alread
I run 3 PC at home and 3 at work, all using W2k. I will never go back. The
machines are from Pentium 166MMX (overclocked to 200), through Celeron 300
(466) to PIII 800, work various PII and PIII around 400 mark. Memory - the
most important think, get as much as you can squeeze. Mine are at leas
Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
> IronWorks wrote:
>
> > Is a PC100 chip sufficient for Win2K? Microsoft's site recommends the PC133
> > minimum.
> >
> > Another possibility for some might be a dual boot system with 98SE and also
> > 2K.
> >
> > Maris
> >
>
> Does Win 2K require a 133mHz motherboard
Art wrote:
>Does Win 2K require a 133mHz motherboard bus? Can WIN 2K run on a
>Celeron system CPU which uses a 66mHz bus?
Win2K doesn't require any particular bus speed. It's just a Microsoft recommendation
- making sure you buy upgrades from their friends at Intel and other chip
manufacturers
PROTECTED]
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of shAf
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 8:40 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2k? Does is
IronWorks wrote:
> Is a PC100 chip sufficient for Win2K? Microsoft's site recommends the PC133
> minimum.
>
> Another possibility for some might be a dual boot system with 98SE and also
> 2K.
>
> Maris
>
Does Win 2K require a 133mHz motherboard bus? Can WIN 2K run on a
Celeron system CPU
"Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Subject: RE: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K?
> Does is manage color like W98SE?
Just in case it hasn't been stated clearly, Win98SE, WinME and Win2K all
use the same colour management sy
-Original Message-
From: IronWorks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 1:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
W98SE?
Is a PC100 chip sufficient for Win2K? Microsoft's site recommends the PC133
mi
>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 1:11 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2K? Does is manage color like
W98SE?
| > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of ALLM Rose
| >
| > I am considering whether to reload Win98SE, WinMe or Win2000
Professional on
|
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of ALLM Rose
>
> I am considering whether to reload Win98SE, WinMe or Win2000 Professional on
> my Athlon 700 (256MB SDRAM) system. I am currently using Win98SE, Adobe
> Photoshop 6.0, printing with an Epson 870 through WiziWYG color profiles,
> and scanning
Frank writes ...
> Windows 2000 is in every way superior.
>
But it handles color management the same as Win98se ...
shAf :o)
EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: filmscanners: Anyone using Win2k? Does is manage color like
> W98SE?
>
>
> I am considering whether to reload Win98SE, WinMe or Win2000
> Professional on
> my Athlon 700 (256MB SDRAM) system. I am currently using Win98SE, Adobe
> Photoshop 6.0, pri
I am considering whether to reload Win98SE, WinMe or Win2000 Professional on
my Athlon 700 (256MB SDRAM) system. I am currently using Win98SE, Adobe
Photoshop 6.0, printing with an Epson 870 through WiziWYG color profiles,
and scanning images through my Nikon LS-30 with Vuescan.
Does anyone see
44 matches
Mail list logo
