XP help

Ltspd · 01-11-2002, 06:55 AM

I need some help with XP. I just installed sunday and like it. The only 2 probs I have are as follows:

1) I am now using outlook and it doesnt seem to handle attachments very well. They come across blank in some cases.

2) Now when I take pics with my digi camera and d/l to XP they are huge. I always use Adobe photo deluxe to maniuplate them. I ususlly have to size them to 6x4 and change them to jpigs. Now when I do that the photo size is still huge, like 300k vs 30k on ME and 98. Doing everything the same just cant u/l shots to the BB due to the size.

**schrocat** · 01-11-2002, 08:20 AM

Dude...

That's wierd.
Never heard of that before.

I'll ask around of course...and get looked at funny for ya'.

Ltspd · 01-11-2002, 08:34 AM

Here is a few funny looks to get you prepared.

I took some impotant emails and forwarded them to a yahoo addy I have until I loaded XP, then I sent them back because outlook was working well. I deleted the ones from yahoo and when I tried to open them back up I they came as attachments with blank messages.

I cant really ask Microshift

If you know what I mean......

Aragorn · 01-11-2002, 09:25 AM

Here's what I'd recommend to resolve this issue:

Reformat your hard drive.
Insert a Win2K Pro CD into your CDROM
Reboot your machine
Follow the instructions on the screen
VIOLA! You're now running a superior OS that is much more stable.

eses · 01-11-2002, 11:05 AM

...with the exception being Win2k probably won't support his digital camera.

Ltspd- in Outlook, set your security a notch lower. By default they have it set kind of high, and I've heard of many people have problems sending/getting attachments with their email. Yours might be a different problem though.

What quality are you saving the jpegs at? If your trying to save them at 10-11 (Max quality) you will get a huge image still. You should be able to control the compression rate. By default it would be higher than you'd want. Also are you shooting the pictures at a higher resolution than normal?

**schrocat** · 01-11-2002, 11:20 AM

Yeah...make sure you didn't take the camera into Uber HQ mode.

Been there, done that.

Aragorn,
That was cold!

**drlowz** · 01-11-2002, 12:59 PM

I've heard that XP is nothing but trouble..Lots of things not compatible and such..Well I will stick in the middle ages with my Windows 98.

Ltspd · 01-11-2002, 05:19 PM

XP found and installed all my hardware on a home built system, which usually are more trouble for hardware drivers than the box systems.

I didnt have any trouble with the pictures before. I am saving them in the same format of jpeg as before but I will go into Adobe and see if there is a compression.

I set the security to the lower of the 2 options, will see how that works.

I like XP, havent used w2k, but used ME (sux), 98,95 and so far I like it the best. Its also been the most stable with the large graphics program I run (3d solid modeling) so for me its working well.

reefhead · 01-11-2002, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aragorn
Here's what I'd recommend to resolve this issue:

Reformat your hard drive.
Insert a Win2K Pro CD into your CDROM
Reboot your machine
Follow the instructions on the screen
VIOLA! You're now running a superior OS that is much more stable.

Agreed, My college uses this on all our PC--It's a great OS

Aragorn · 01-11-2002, 11:22 PM

Eses,

I run Win2K Pro on my laptop and Win2K Advanced Server on my tower(what I'm typing on now). FWIW, I've never had any problems downloading images to either of them from my Sony digital camera. In fact, I've seen better driver support for Win2K than XP re: DVD drives/cards, sound cards. For example, my son's PC which was recently upgraded to XP(much to my chagrine) has a Guillemot Fortissimo sound card. Worked great on Win98. Upgraded to WinXP...locks up regularly when playing MP3's. Enter Win2K Pro for his machine...smooth as silk.

Ltspd · 01-12-2002, 09:30 AM

Got the picture issue fixed, it was something inside of Adobe.

Lowered the security on email, havent tested it yet.

New problem is the CDRW software (adaptec 4.0) doesnt work in XP, nor does much from what I have read.

Maybe I spoke to soon.......

Aragorn, is w2k any better? Would seem that the issues with it might have been resolved on xp. Both are NT kernals correct? I have a home built system (I built) which tends to be the problem in most cases due to the hardware verses amount paid. I often think I should try a Dell (what I use at work)

eses · 01-12-2002, 11:15 AM

Ltspd, my opinion you will get better future support in XP than in Win2000.

Almost all Win98/ME versions of CDRW software aren't compatable with Windows XP and Windows 2000, you will need to upgrade and hopefully yours will let you do it for free. Roxio's Easy CD Creator lets you upgrade the XP compatability patch for free. There is no patch for versions before 5.0 I don't think.

However, I've found XP's built in CDRW support to be pretty worthwhile, you simply copy the files to your CDRW icon and when your done, right click on it and "Write Files." I've stopped using my CDRW software for the most part and have just been using the built in support. Or if your looking for new software, try Nero; it is pretty good, and if your the type that doesn't pay for your software, it is available on Morpheus (as well as a demo.)

Aragorn, we all have different experiences, one thing I just *love* about the PC/Microsoft world. I was running Windows 2000 on our servers for sometime, and one of which was a old desktop machine. Nothing worked anymore, even the OEM video drivers for it. Scanner was incompatable, USB kept locking up, and the ethernet was giving us problems off and on. Switched them to XP and it was much better, switched them to Linux and I've felt this warm glow ever since.

I also think since the "future is XP" more support will come out for it as it will be the home users platform. Win2k while will still be supported, will probably be the last OS manufacturers make drivers for while going down the chain of making updates.

Aragorn · 01-12-2002, 03:00 PM

Hmmmm....where to begin. OK, here goes.

Ltspd, currently Win2K is more stable than WinXP. I'm sure MS will get it right eventually w/ WinXP. However, if you want performance, stability, and compatibilty...right now, then go w/ Win2K Pro.

Are Win2K and WinXP based upon the "NT" kernal? Yes. They are extremely similar and alot of the WinXP code has been "borrowed" from Win2K, but they're not the same. Interestingly enough. when I installed WinXP on my son's machine, I'm looking at the install screens saying to myself "Well, this certainly looks familiar", referring to Win2K installs I've done.

I've been involved w/ Win2K since before it was released. I was involved in beta testing when I was the IT manager at Kirkwood Ski Resort. In fact, I found it so stable, I ran the entire Ticketing Department on it through the entire season of 99 without a single problem!!!

I have installed Win2K countless times without a hitch. I've installed on platforms w/ Nvidia, Tseng Labs, Jaton, Linksys, 3com..."tons o cards" w/ no problem. I've installed XP on only 4 platforms and have encountered at least 1 compatibility "glitch" on each machine. The XP version I installed was Home Edition. I have not installed Professional though.

As a retort to Eses' statement about the future:

Eses, you are correct to a certain extent. XP does indeed appear to be the "envisioned" platform for the "home user". However, Win2K will definitely be the platform for the IT professional for years to come. There is(and will continue to be) solid support for Win2K for quite some time, both server and Pro. Eventually we will see Win2K become the exclusive server platform( read Windows .NET server ) and WinXP become the client. Until I see a better XP environment though, I'll stay w/ Win2K. JMO

FWIW, I've been running Win2K on this machine here for almost 2 years. It's got an Asus motherboard w/ Via chipset, Nvidia GeForce2 graphics adapter, Sound Blaster Live 5.1 w/ LiveDrive and Digital output, RealTek ethernet card, Plextor CD-RW, Seagate Tape Drive, Adaptec 29160 SCSI host adapter w/ mirrored drive arrays, Canon USB scanner, Sony DSC70 camera, 3com Hotsync for my Palm V via RS-232 of course, Borderware IPsec client( for VPN access to my customers networks), wireless mouse, USB keyboard etc. etc. etc. and this platform has been "rock solid" ever since. HTH

asmith · 01-12-2002, 10:37 PM

I agree with Aragorn. I have just recently upgrade all of my computers to 2000 Pro. Most of the computer that I work on at work are also Windows 2K pro. I have set up two computers at work with XP pro and I have not been impressed. They have had lots of problems. I recommend 2000 over XP right now. XP might be pretty good in a few months, but I won't upgrade untill they have released at least 2 service packs.

Andrew

ChrisIsBored · 01-22-2002, 04:32 AM

Eventually we will see Win2K become the exclusive server platform( read Windows .NET server ) and WinXP become the client.

.NET is going to be utilized mainly by WinXP Server, not 2K. You'll find towards the end of this year how correct I am on this issue, as Microsoft WILL stop pushing Win2k.

Aragorn · 01-22-2002, 10:31 AM

Chris,

Microsoft's own website touts Windows .NET as "built on the reliable Windows 2000 Server Family."

But yes, they are pushing it under their XP offerings.

**SPasse** · 01-23-2002, 03:28 PM

Hi All,

I am Senior Systems Hardware Architect for my company, and I get to analyze in a lab environment, the OS choices for my company.

Windows 2000 Pro is hands down, the most stable (desktop) platform that Microsoft makes.

As of yet, XP isn’t even close.

Also, I have no problem with Nero on this OS.

Ltspd, are you using Outlook or Outlook express?

Outlook Express runs very well under 2000.

Outlook, is not very stable under any OS, particularly under ME.

Regards,

Scott

Firefish · 01-26-2002, 09:44 PM

At first I would have to agree that XP is trouble but...
I found that loading XP over another OS causes a ton of trouble. So I put all my docs and pics on the D: drive, nuked the C: drive. Then I did a clean install off the CD (booted off the CD onto a formated C: drive) Installed without a hitch, retrieved my private files from the D: drive and I have not had a single problem with XP since! I'm really liking it.
fwiw

01-11-2002, 06:55 AM	#1
Ltspd Governor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Arden, NC USA Posts: 2,767	XP help I need some help with XP. I just installed sunday and like it. The only 2 probs I have are as follows: 1) I am now using outlook and it doesnt seem to handle attachments very well. They come across blank in some cases. 2) Now when I take pics with my digi camera and d/l to XP they are huge. I always use Adobe photo deluxe to maniuplate them. I ususlly have to size them to 6x4 and change them to jpigs. Now when I do that the photo size is still huge, like 300k vs 30k on ME and 98. Doing everything the same just cant u/l shots to the BB due to the size. __________________ Paul C Timing has an awful lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

01-11-2002, 08:20 AM	#2
schrocat Moderator Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Hilliard , Fl. Posts: 3,365	Dude... That's wierd. Never heard of that before. I'll ask around of course...and get looked at funny for ya'. __________________ "One man's vulgarity is another man's lyric" -Justice John Marshall Harlan "Send Lawyers, Guns and Money." -WZ

01-11-2002, 08:34 AM	#3
Ltspd Governor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Arden, NC USA Posts: 2,767	Here is a few funny looks to get you prepared. I took some impotant emails and forwarded them to a yahoo addy I have until I loaded XP, then I sent them back because outlook was working well. I deleted the ones from yahoo and when I tried to open them back up I they came as attachments with blank messages. I cant really ask Microshift If you know what I mean...... __________________ Paul C Timing has an awful lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

01-11-2002, 09:25 AM	#4
Aragorn Governor Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Pine Grove, CA USA Posts: 2,064	Here's what I'd recommend to resolve this issue: Reformat your hard drive. Insert a Win2K Pro CD into your CDROM Reboot your machine Follow the instructions on the screen VIOLA! You're now running a superior OS that is much more stable. __________________ "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."

01-11-2002, 11:20 AM	#6
schrocat Moderator Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Hilliard , Fl. Posts: 3,365	Yeah...make sure you didn't take the camera into Uber HQ mode. Been there, done that. Aragorn, That was cold! __________________ "One man's vulgarity is another man's lyric" -Justice John Marshall Harlan "Send Lawyers, Guns and Money." -WZ

01-11-2002, 11:05 AM	#5
eses Council Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Seattle Posts: 270	...with the exception being Win2k probably won't support his digital camera. Ltspd- in Outlook, set your security a notch lower. By default they have it set kind of high, and I've heard of many people have problems sending/getting attachments with their email. Yours might be a different problem though. What quality are you saving the jpegs at? If your trying to save them at 10-11 (Max quality) you will get a huge image still. You should be able to control the compression rate. By default it would be higher than you'd want. Also are you shooting the pictures at a higher resolution than normal?

01-11-2002, 12:59 PM	#7
drlowz Moderator Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Bardstown, Ky. Posts: 481	I've heard that XP is nothing but trouble..Lots of things not compatible and such..Well I will stick in the middle ages with my Windows 98. __________________ Are you interested in lowriders or cars in general? UnitedRidaZ.org your automotive forums.

01-11-2002, 05:19 PM	#8
Ltspd Governor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Arden, NC USA Posts: 2,767	XP found and installed all my hardware on a home built system, which usually are more trouble for hardware drivers than the box systems. I didnt have any trouble with the pictures before. I am saving them in the same format of jpeg as before but I will go into Adobe and see if there is a compression. I set the security to the lower of the 2 options, will see how that works. I like XP, havent used w2k, but used ME (sux), 98,95 and so far I like it the best. Its also been the most stable with the large graphics program I run (3d solid modeling) so for me its working well. __________________ Paul C Timing has an awful lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

01-11-2002, 11:22 PM	#10
Aragorn Governor Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Pine Grove, CA USA Posts: 2,064	Eses, I run Win2K Pro on my laptop and Win2K Advanced Server on my tower(what I'm typing on now). FWIW, I've never had any problems downloading images to either of them from my Sony digital camera. In fact, I've seen better driver support for Win2K than XP re: DVD drives/cards, sound cards. For example, my son's PC which was recently upgraded to XP(much to my chagrine) has a Guillemot Fortissimo sound card. Worked great on Win98. Upgraded to WinXP...locks up regularly when playing MP3's. Enter Win2K Pro for his machine...smooth as silk. __________________ "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."

01-12-2002, 09:30 AM	#11
Ltspd Governor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Arden, NC USA Posts: 2,767	Got the picture issue fixed, it was something inside of Adobe. Lowered the security on email, havent tested it yet. New problem is the CDRW software (adaptec 4.0) doesnt work in XP, nor does much from what I have read. Maybe I spoke to soon....... Aragorn, is w2k any better? Would seem that the issues with it might have been resolved on xp. Both are NT kernals correct? I have a home built system (I built) which tends to be the problem in most cases due to the hardware verses amount paid. I often think I should try a Dell (what I use at work) __________________ Paul C Timing has an awful lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

01-12-2002, 11:15 AM	#12
eses Council Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Seattle Posts: 270	Ltspd, my opinion you will get better future support in XP than in Win2000. Almost all Win98/ME versions of CDRW software aren't compatable with Windows XP and Windows 2000, you will need to upgrade and hopefully yours will let you do it for free. Roxio's Easy CD Creator lets you upgrade the XP compatability patch for free. There is no patch for versions before 5.0 I don't think. However, I've found XP's built in CDRW support to be pretty worthwhile, you simply copy the files to your CDRW icon and when your done, right click on it and "Write Files." I've stopped using my CDRW software for the most part and have just been using the built in support. Or if your looking for new software, try Nero; it is pretty good, and if your the type that doesn't pay for your software, it is available on Morpheus (as well as a demo.) Aragorn, we all have different experiences, one thing I just love about the PC/Microsoft world. I was running Windows 2000 on our servers for sometime, and one of which was a old desktop machine. Nothing worked anymore, even the OEM video drivers for it. Scanner was incompatable, USB kept locking up, and the ethernet was giving us problems off and on. Switched them to XP and it was much better, switched them to Linux and I've felt this warm glow ever since. I also think since the "future is XP" more support will come out for it as it will be the home users platform. Win2k while will still be supported, will probably be the last OS manufacturers make drivers for while going down the chain of making updates.

01-12-2002, 03:00 PM	#13
Aragorn Governor Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Pine Grove, CA USA Posts: 2,064	Hmmmm....where to begin. OK, here goes. Ltspd, currently Win2K is more stable than WinXP. I'm sure MS will get it right eventually w/ WinXP. However, if you want performance, stability, and compatibilty...right now, then go w/ Win2K Pro. Are Win2K and WinXP based upon the "NT" kernal? Yes. They are extremely similar and alot of the WinXP code has been "borrowed" from Win2K, but they're not the same. Interestingly enough. when I installed WinXP on my son's machine, I'm looking at the install screens saying to myself "Well, this certainly looks familiar", referring to Win2K installs I've done. I've been involved w/ Win2K since before it was released. I was involved in beta testing when I was the IT manager at Kirkwood Ski Resort. In fact, I found it so stable, I ran the entire Ticketing Department on it through the entire season of 99 without a single problem!!! I have installed Win2K countless times without a hitch. I've installed on platforms w/ Nvidia, Tseng Labs, Jaton, Linksys, 3com..."tons o cards" w/ no problem. I've installed XP on only 4 platforms and have encountered at least 1 compatibility "glitch" on each machine. The XP version I installed was Home Edition. I have not installed Professional though. As a retort to Eses' statement about the future: Eses, you are correct to a certain extent. XP does indeed appear to be the "envisioned" platform for the "home user". However, Win2K will definitely be the platform for the IT professional for years to come. There is(and will continue to be) solid support for Win2K for quite some time, both server and Pro. Eventually we will see Win2K become the exclusive server platform( read Windows .NET server ) and WinXP become the client. Until I see a better XP environment though, I'll stay w/ Win2K. JMO FWIW, I've been running Win2K on this machine here for almost 2 years. It's got an Asus motherboard w/ Via chipset, Nvidia GeForce2 graphics adapter, Sound Blaster Live 5.1 w/ LiveDrive and Digital output, RealTek ethernet card, Plextor CD-RW, Seagate Tape Drive, Adaptec 29160 SCSI host adapter w/ mirrored drive arrays, Canon USB scanner, Sony DSC70 camera, 3com Hotsync for my Palm V via RS-232 of course, Borderware IPsec client( for VPN access to my customers networks), wireless mouse, USB keyboard etc. etc. etc. and this platform has been "rock solid" ever since. HTH __________________ "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."

01-12-2002, 10:37 PM	#14
asmith Mayor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Lenexa, KS, USA Posts: 978	I agree with Aragorn. I have just recently upgrade all of my computers to 2000 Pro. Most of the computer that I work on at work are also Windows 2K pro. I have set up two computers at work with XP pro and I have not been impressed. They have had lots of problems. I recommend 2000 over XP right now. XP might be pretty good in a few months, but I won't upgrade untill they have released at least 2 service packs. Andrew __________________ Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that amateurs built the Ark. Professionals built the Titanic.

01-22-2002, 04:32 AM	#15
ChrisIsBored Reefland Lurker Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: San Antonio, Tx Posts: 47	Eventually we will see Win2K become the exclusive server platform( read Windows .NET server ) and WinXP become the client. .NET is going to be utilized mainly by WinXP Server, not 2K. You'll find towards the end of this year how correct I am on this issue, as Microsoft WILL stop pushing Win2k.

01-22-2002, 10:31 AM	#16
Aragorn Governor Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Pine Grove, CA USA Posts: 2,064	Chris, Microsoft's own website touts Windows .NET as "built on the reliable Windows 2000 Server Family." But yes, they are pushing it under their XP offerings. __________________ "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

01-23-2002, 03:28 PM	#17
SPasse Moderator Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: Forney Texas USA Posts: 2,261	Hi All, I am Senior Systems Hardware Architect for my company, and I get to analyze in a lab environment, the OS choices for my company. Windows 2000 Pro is hands down, the most stable (desktop) platform that Microsoft makes. As of yet, XP isn’t even close. Also, I have no problem with Nero on this OS. Ltspd, are you using Outlook or Outlook express? Outlook Express runs very well under 2000. Outlook, is not very stable under any OS, particularly under ME. Regards, Scott __________________ Founding Member – Rocky Mountain Reef Club You can see my former reeftank at http://www.sdpasse.com

01-26-2002, 09:44 PM	#18
Firefish Mayor Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Douglas, Ma Posts: 775	At first I would have to agree that XP is trouble but... I found that loading XP over another OS causes a ton of trouble. So I put all my docs and pics on the D: drive, nuked the C: drive. Then I did a clean install off the CD (booted off the CD onto a formated C: drive) Installed without a hitch, retrieved my private files from the D: drive and I have not had a single problem with XP since! I'm really liking it. fwiw __________________ In matters of principle, stand like a rock; in matters of taste, swim with the current. -- Thomas Jefferson

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode