NT or ME? - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- NT or ME?

Posted by ohm on Nov-27-2000 22:22:

I am going to be buying a new computer in the next month that I plan to use for music editing, composing... I would like to get NT 4.0 but am not sure on software compatability. Does anyone have any experience using NT for this purpose or know of commonly used software that does not run on NT?

PS: Anyone know why I couldn't get on this sight for the last 2 weeks?

Posted by DJ Guangzhou on Nov-27-2000 22:45:

If you are doing music editing and composing you really should get a mac. That is really the only thing the mac still does 110% better than the pc. Otherwise, you are just throwing your money away.

Posted by mizzuno on Nov-27-2000 23:52:

OHM, My professional opinion is that you should use windows 2000 professional, it is much more stable than ME and it is able to use 2 processors..my vote goes to Win 2000.

MIZZ

Posted by ohm on Nov-27-2000 23:57:

DJ Guangzhou
I'll be nice and forget you said that

Posted by MenTall on Nov-28-2000 01:30:

Indeed go for Win2k... And screw the Mac. They've just released the most crappy Mac ever, which will cost them their advantage over the PC.

By the way, there's much more PC software out there than Mac software, so make up your own mind: getting that so called 110%, and pay for everything you need, or take that 100% for granted, and download your software

------------------
Breathe trance - live trance - think trance

Posted by MIthrandir on Nov-28-2000 06:21:

Well I'll have to agree with Guangzhou on this one .. OK PCs offer more programs and you can easily download them on the internet .. but I think Mac is still the best with all 'arts' stuff .. graphs, music, video .. stuff like that .. they offer better performances and when you bought all the peri and progs, you'll be sure you won't have to buy others 'til long time instead of pc's progs which are not all perfect .. i'm not saying macs are perfect, but I think they are still the best in all arts stuff like i already said ..

Again: it's only my opinion You can do whatever you want with it .. but I think DJ Guangzhou will be have the same opinion as me And I'm not sure but I think most of movie studios use macs (more stable and all what I already said previously )

Anyways .. Cya man!

------------------
Mithrandir [ Trance is LIFE! ]
TGT Online

Posted by Sandman on Nov-29-2000 19:27:

i still have win 98. But i'm going to switch to win ME... some of my friends has it and they have no problems with it.
Don't know anything about win 2000, only that it is newer then win ME...

But my choice is for now WIN ME

sandman

Posted by mizzuno on Nov-29-2000 19:30:

2000 is much more stable...WIN ME= SERVICE PACK.

Mizz

Posted by trancaholic on Nov-29-2000 21:34:

There's much more software for windoze, and just think of all that fun you're going to have when you've been composing for a few hours, and you get an "illegal pagefault" dragging your work with it on its way to hell.

I'm not a mac-addict but try out the alternatives (be, linux, amiga/elate, qnx) before you splash out $$$ on an OS that should have been laid to rest years ago. They run on the same hardware and is free you know. There may not be tons of software for these OSs but are you going to be composing using more packages anyway?

Posted by ohm on Nov-30-2000 16:31:

I have several friends that also make the claim that Macs are better with "artsy" programs, but when asked nobody ever seems to have any proof to back that statement up. How are they better? Yes, movie studios use them for editing, and the Avid software is only written for Mac, but is that because Mac is better or is it because Steve Jobs convinced the makers of Avid that they should use Mac? Before anyone takes it as law that Macs are in fact better for these applications, shouldn't they find out how they're better?

I think I will go with ME as I know the programs I want will work and am not sure on compatability with NT and 2K. Thanks for the feedback

[This message has been edited by ohm (edited 11-30-2000).]

Posted by mizzuno on Nov-30-2000 16:47:

I have had no compatibility problems on Win 2000, i don't think u would have a problem running applications under windows 2000 as it supports direct x natively, windows ME is just another service pack, i wouldn't waste my money, 2000 uses protected memory space and can use two processors(comes in handy when you're multitasking). IF you want, use WIN ME but don't say that its due to compatibility issues especially with production software, now if U are worried about gaming thats another matter.

MIZZ

Posted by sKyBreAK on Nov-30-2000 17:35:

ME sucks... I would rather use Win98se...
Mainly because of Windows Media Player 7...
Long loading, crappy and it just basically sucks.
Windows 2K is nice but not for games... But like Diablo 2 and Red Alert 2 still works on it... I would suggest you to use Win2K for audio stuff since it's like much more stable than Win98se/ME... It's like Win98 crashes at least once every two days (You can try this out yourself). =)

Later

Posted by Aviston on Dec-01-2000 20:35:

I think what Ohm is after is how compatible the current plethora of music software is with 2K. Has anyone actually run the soundforge/cubase/softsynths/rebirth/etc/etc on Windows 2K successfully? If so, then 2K is the better choice. If compatibility wasn't an issue, we'd all be runing Linux.