Hacker News Reader

Comment by xav_authentique | Hacker News Reader

No love for Windows 2000? NT kernel with the classic Windows interface. It ran pretty well on Windows 98 machines and was extremely stable.

View on HN

So long as you didn't play games. 2000 meant abandoning the vast majority of your PC game library, early on.

You could hack around that and get DirectX working, I was doing all my gaming on Windows 2000 back in the day.

Though I think I may have had a proper dos boot disk for some games, hard to remember, it was quite awhile back. :)

You would've needed a DOS boot disk, yes; while Win98SE was fairly great for playing DOS games, 2000 was most certainly not.

I ran Windows 2000 in high school and never had trouble running any of my games. That said, I didn't have any DOS games in my library, which I'm guessing is what you are referring to.

I tried once. Kinda liked it but it was heavy on my built-for-98-se machine and lacked some things a teenager wanted in a computer - like DirectX.

But I've tried anyway. Then I got owned so hard by Nimda that it is still the first thing that comes to my mind when I think of Windows 2000.

Win 2000 Professional was my favorite windows ever.

Fast and light as Windows 98 but more stable than Windows XP.

2000 and original XP are almost identical (IIRC one is NT 5.0 and the other is NT 5.1). IMHO, The reason hackers loved 2000 and not XP is because of the toy-like XP theme - which shows hackers can be shallow too.

Win2K, good memories. Used it for Delphi and some C++ Builder development between 2000 and 2001; pretty solid, probably more than XP (at least until XPSP2) but needed some more horsepower to use it properly.

>It ran pretty well on Windows 98 machines

I don't think so, for example requirements for RAM:

Windows 98: 16 megabytes (MB) of memory (24 MB recommended)

Windows 2000: 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM recommended minimum;

Reply on news.ycombinator.com