Ok, 1st off i just wanna say, Win2k-01 is NOT any and i mean ANY diff to Win2k.........It's totally superficial....if u want a good picture of what the new os codenamed "Whislter" will be like, Run Win Millennium and add the Win2k Visual Service Pack..eh Voila. Point is....it's totally overhyped, because there have been many !unofficial! Win NT Emulators for windows 98 around on warez sites that actually work RELIABLY, for some time now. So.....get one of them and get one of the unofficial Win Millennium Visual Emulators for Win 98 (like the old Win98 emulator that was out for Win95) and Bingo Bango...U have Win2k-01 . Obviously, M$ Will build in coding enhacements, but i imagine, like the transition from Win98 to Win98 SE, these will be totaly superficial, and wont enhance the end user experience.........The only advantage I can see to having a dual integrated OS is that one will be able to run BOTH Win9x coded progs AND Win NT Progs from one specifically desgined system, But like ALL "specifically design systems" there s always a BETTER Unofficial version....(Linux is a 100% classic example)

In my opinion.....In a majority, it will be MUCH more beneficial for Home users to have a pre integrated system, but to be honest, i dont see the point for home users, and Windows Millenium, based entirely on a Win9x Kernal, would be the better choice for home users, for the moment, as it'll be the first dual kernal OS, and like ALL new concepts, no matter how tried and tested in a controlled Environment, will cause a heavy amount of problems in the real world. I'd wait for a 2nd if not 3rd generation Version of a Combined OS before i make the Switch from Win2k as my Primary OS of choice

How dumb are you?

That release is a pre-alpha release.

The plans for Whistler are a) to have a desktop version of NT for normal consumers b) add new graphics shells (supposed to be 4 new shells), and c) fix Win2k bugs

Right now, it looks like they are working on making it viable for normal consumers, making it mostly like WinME, but based on Win2k code. Probably more than that, seeing where as that was a pre-alpha build that leaked, the product isn't even in beta yet, and there is a HUUUUGE change between finals and alphas, there is a HUUUUGE difference going from just beta to beta, why don't you go get a freakin life.

btw, ALL they are doing to make it vialble for consumers is changing the interface to be easier, making it run games better, etc..., it's still Win2k, so it's not technically the first of the OS line to have it. Aka, it's NOT a new concept, it's just new to have a consumer Windows support dual processors, but it's not new for NT. Whistler is STILL NT, just because it is for consumers doesn't change that.

Ok, CPUguy, i've seen your postings before, and you are a 100% genuinly knowledgeable guy, which makes a change on this newsposting!

Ok, basically, you are right in some respects and not others in the sense that Win2k-01 (Whistler) Is NT based. However it does and will contain parts of the old Win09x Kernal that we have all grown to love and hate ?!?! Your points are very valid, IE the dual processor support (which is by no means new to NT users) But the general consumer user will find it very much a new expericence. It begins to open up new possibilities for the ordinary home user. But, you are quite rite, The technology is OLD. However, what ISNT old is the fact that this NEW OS WILL be win9x ANd Win NT COMBINED. This, as you realy have 2 admit, is a major leap forward to the home market, if not the business market. I'm a 100% Dedicated Win2k User....And i do find, on ocassion, my old Win98 Programs wont work with Win98. Mostly, these are progs i've edited/hexed/Resource Edited myself, so granted, DrWatson will kick in and abort the prog. But as i said in my previous posting, there are emulators out there to correct jst that!.

All in all tho, You are correcdt, as am i.

We both are.!!!

I think tho, we can BOTH make REAL comment, when we both get a Beta / Release Candidate!

Take Care man!

Rite, u cant get it legitimately atm, only via warez...go look on Dalnet or even at the bottom of this artical!

First off I wanna start off with this linux vs Windows war I see going on here. It's almost every article or every post concerning anything never-the-less a OS article that someone or more like 75% of the posts are bashing linux or windows. Now I simply can't understand how or why people are running around like chickens with their heads cut off trying to not only bash but drive the users of the other OS into the ground. For those 'lame' people who below in this article were talking about how linux sucks, let me ask them if we have it their way and take away all linux/unix/solaris/irix in the world? Think it'd be so great having no internet eh?? Well...I...I thought you said linux sucks and was no good compared to windows?? I guess you all seemed to forget that the entire backbone of the internet itself and what it developed from was Unix which is virtually what linux is. Did you know that 65% of all internet webservers run the Apache Web Server which coincidentially is for *omg* linux/Unix!? Linux *i'll use that referring to all unix based OS's for this artcile* currently is the strongest suited OS for any internet related/IT needed solution for stability, security and makes a heck of a great server. Now before the 'lamers' start running around like chickens with their heads cut off...again. I am NOT bashing windows either. Windows within it's self is a superb OS. The fault that many of you all fail to see in yourselves is that you can NOT compare apples to oranges...in our case Windows to Linux. The only thing Windows and Linux holds in common is they are operating systems. Other than that they just can't be held in a side by side comparison. Heck I've been a windows user now for years and years and yes it has it's crashes, bugs, more crashes but it gets the job done for VB apps, streaming video editing, games you name it. Stuff is just written around windows that we need. Linux is a server based OS period. There are the X-windows enhancements to make it towards the desktop but right now it's still server streamlined. Where did linux come from...Unix/Solaris all server based OS's for heavy duty computing back in the `70's. Where did Windows come from...a shell to Dos back around `85. It's just plain useless to carry the argument any farther on which is better because you just can't compare two things that aren't alike. I've used close to every distro of linux even SCO unix, they are great for their purposes of servers, just like windows is great as it's purpose of a desktop OS...and even NT/2000 as a server is a good os too. So my word to the lam..I mean wise is pick what suits you and shut up and use it with a smile. If you want to learn another OS great! But don't sit and bash it or the users of it until you use at least 50% of it's potential which means more than a simple install.

Onto Whistler...

Whether this is a filler space artcile or not, who knows but it is kinda neat to see some word on it. I have used whistler as well as Neptune, and 2000 and right now they are all the same with some minor kernel changes with a few more gui changes. I gotta agree with the person who wrote right now it's so early in developer release (not even alpha yet) that people are in the gotta have mood. There is no purpose in having it. Heck I'm one of those gotta have people just to see what is new, plus it gives me a even more learning curve on the testing phases of programs. In short, whistler is not worth spending hours on end downloading just to install once and ditch. Put your time towards getting....netscape 6 or something. As for MS's plan to upgrade a OS every year...whats wrong with that? Technology is going so fast the need is there to upgrade and to the narrow minded who think it's microsoft's plan to milk us dry...get a life. Part of the reason people think MS "owns" us is because of those views. Microsoft has done their wrong things but they are providing us with what we need aren't they? What else can we ask for except their money too...or have we already done that?

Linux is hardly like Unix at all. Unix is about 10x more powerful, secure, and stable.
There are maybe .05% of the sites on the inet that use Linux for a server, MOST use a form of BSD. Not Unix, not Linux, BSD.

And just so you know, there is such thing as Apache for Win32.

http://www.apache.org/docs/windows.html

Get real, load Windows 95/98/NTWKS/Server on to a 486dx machine with 32 Meg RAM, and any good VGA card. Then Load Linux on to a machine with the same configuration 486Dx ....
Check the performance..there is no point saying one OS is better than the other. You need to compare performance by comparison.

Try it. Go on try Both OS on two Computers. Load similar applications. And watch how Linux perform in real world...
What are we expecting from a better computer and a better OS? Better Performance! and stability!. Isn't it?

Its ironic that Microsoft is already working on another OS. Makes you wonder if they'll ever get it right. Those of you who bash Linux need to watch your tongue. I don't use Linux for a lot of reasons, but there is one key thing about Linux that Windows will never get right and thats security and stability. I'm sorry but if Linux would give me what I need I would choose Linux any day of the week. I haven't seen a good copy of Windows since windows 3.11. I have to give Linux a lot of credit. They have come along way and I wouldn't count them out. Everybody felt the same way toward AMD and look where there at now. After years of sitting in the back corner there now not only fighting with Intel head to head but winning as well. The only way Windows will be the best operating system is if they make one operating system that is not only stable, but will allow for both business and game use, but I don't see that day coming any day soon.

I love people who make ridiculous statements. Find one operating system that does not get upgraded every year or so. It's just absurd to think that an operating system will ever be "finished". Technology changes daily and all of the OS companies have to try to adapt to the latest trends. If you were happy with Windows 3.11 then so be it but I think you are missing out on a lot.

P.S. I play tons of games on my Win2K machine and it is yet to crash since I started on Beta 3 over a year ago.

And what kinda reasons are those?

I find that kinda funny. Working on yet another OS? It's the same OS with face lifts and minor changes! 95, 98, 98SE, and ME are all essentially the same thing with kernel updates for new hardware.

And of course, every other OS doesn't get updated. No kernel updates from good ol' Linus. No updates for Apple, or BeOS, or Sun, or anybody...

So linux and unix are the same, huh? you are trying to say that since *some* Unices have been stable this must mean that Linux is stable?
So why is there a new kernel every month?

Does this mean that win3.11, win NT, 98 and OS/2 are the same as well? Since they share the same 'base architecture' and interface?

It's even worse: with your reasoning, NT should be compared to the infamous DEC VMS system -they share the same microkernel.

Compare the number of exploits for unix systems (that are still working) to those for Windows systems, taken in account the number of users on both platform. I can *hear* you sigh..

Not to speak on all the opensource apps etc that
a) are always out of date (eg: should I take version 1.99.005b.3c.r2 or 1.99.005b.3d.rc2?)
b) compile everywhere *except* on my machine (why does this always happen?)

I think we're not in such a bad situation with Windows!

Where Can I get the Windows Me beta (on a cd) and the other upcoming beta versions of windows? Or the question should be:

How can I become a Windows beta tester?

Currently, the beta applications for Windows ME are closed. They have reached their beta testing quota, and are almost at beta 3. I'm not sure if Microsoft has started accepting beta applications for Whistler yet, but if you would want to test a Windows OS, Whistler is what I would shoot for.

Go to Microsoft's website.In the events section,the TechNet events are
usually a good source of betas.I got the Beta 3 release of Win 2000 at
TechNet.These are very informative sources of tech information,too.

Ok, yes it's intresting news. but, the product and build don't merrit the hype. At this stage of the game, it's more for those that want to get recognized amongst there peers as having "Whistler the alpha version DUDE!!", not a usable nor wanted product amongst beta testers who need a working and operational system, nor is it worth it to those who do gamming and or buisness. sure it's funny that yet again MS has oopsed out a version to the web.
Well, i think it's nice that microsoft is still trying to develop OS's they think we wil like. i don't think with a final release with so many damn bugs like win2k has, that this is a good idea to run. (sense i am reapeating myself to make a point yet?)
last comment:
i hope whistler turns out nice, cuase right now win2k doesn't do the trick for me. (lay off linux users, i just don't want to run linux on every machine i have) so.. i will wait, till final release, prolly a better cd burn/download then.

to betanews:
i agree this is just filler. but thanks for giving me something to talk about for 5 secs around the cd burner.

yah and nathan is a GREAT name. dont put up stupid commments if you dont want stupid replies.

EVERY alpha/beta of Microsoft's products have hit the 'web.' Every known version of Windows 95/98/2k have been pirated and spread around the world. What's so special of this version of Whistler? This is not news, this is just space filler.

some people actually like reading things like this. if you don't like it, go elsewhere.

Your so right
why did u even read it if its not interesting to you.

is the fact that there are more people willing to try out an ALPHA MS OS, Whistler, than the final versions of all the Linux variants.

hehe, this post is intended to stoke the flames

plur, why even bother. We all know that win2k beats the hell out of linux. no need to smother the noses of linux freaks with that fact. *douses flames*
don't kick 'em when they're down.

I dont think there is "final" version of linux dummie...

LINUX IS A JOKE WHO WANTS TO SPEND HOURS COMPILING THERE KERNEL?
ONLY IF YOUR A SAD GEEK WHOS GOT NO LIFE IVE INSTALLED REDHAT ONCE AND IM SORRY IT SUCKS WINDOWS 2000 BUILD 1946 WAS WAY FASTER LINUX LOVERS FACE IT YOU ONLY LIKE IT COS YA TINK IT ARD TA LURRRRRRN
GROW UP.

all this sounds like you have never even seen linux.
sad, but some people are just ignorant of things around them.
and by the way linux kernel compiles in 10 min on Pentium 100,
and install of redhat 6 takes less than 20 min

compiles in 10mins my butt.

Try 20-30, mins.

And he is correct, only poor people that have lots of time to waste configuring your LinuxOS, which would take 1/20 the time in Win2k, use Linux.
I don't even know what the point in using Linux is, it's a piece of crap, if you don't use Unix or Win2k, at least use BSD, it's much more powerful, stable, and secure than Linux.

more like Linsux (in response to the people who say Winblows)

"Linux is a piece of crap . . ."

There are many (including myself) who would disagree with you. The current distributions of Linux (Redhat, SuSE, Caldera, etc . . .) include a LOT of scripting and "enhancements" that can detract from the overall Linux experience. The core Linux kernel and its associated code are very stable and can serve a wide variety of purposes. If you need something to do file sharing (NFS), or act as an industrial strength terminal server, a commercial version of Unix may be a better alternative. If you need something to use as a DNS server, run NAT, or even act as a mail server, Linux is a good solution. I personally feel that MS Windows (of any flavour) is a mediocre hack of an operating system. If you need enterprise level file sharing, use Netware. If you need Internet services, use Unix or Linux. Windows NT is a joke - especially for a large enterprise. The whole NT domain configuration flat out sucks. Netware and NDS do a remarkably better job as an enterprise operating system. Windows 2000 Server and active directory promise to add some of the functionality of NDS, but let's be real. Novell has been doing this for almost a decade, and Microsoft is the new kid on the block in this arena. As with any Microsoft product this new operating system will have many fatal bugs before it even reaches the stability of NT.

Just one man's opinion. :)
Justin

If you need NAT ...... ETC, use Hardware no piece of software is good. You all miss the point. Not who is better but who is better suited to provide a specific function to a specific type of user. I am sorry to inform all the Linux lovers out there that Microsoft for all it faults has been able to meet that goal.......

ok so lets get this right, linex is better than windows XX(whatever), maybe, no sorry windows is better than Linex, maybe..

What operating is found in nearly every house that has a computer, Windows, why????
Because it works.
Unfourtunatly for us techies, yes i am a techie, and yes so are you, we love to see how things work for our selves otherwise computers would have never taken of from the days ofthe apple2, don't start on that one.
But it's true, we all want bigger better aster computers but the only way we will ever get them is due to the purchaseing power of the mooron user, yes we all hate them, but we owe them BIG, if microsft/apple/sinclair/commadore hadn't brought the computer intot he home and then got the mooron in the street to use it, and make it look cool, we all lve them but how many of you out there got laughed at for being into computers? sad but true, so, are microsoft all that bad, they made the computer industry go bang, not a big bang, but it did go bang, now I can earn silly money for writing programs, something I like doing, and in the evening I go play on my nice new intel machine, would they be so powerful if windows didn't resource hog??? I think not.

It's scary but true.

Remember the early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

That OS/2 Warp 4 is the most stable of them all.

You miss my point. It's obvious that I am not referring to Windows' use on the desktop. I speak specifically to the use of an operating system in an enterprise network environment. Microsoft products simply do not cut it. 25% of server OS shipments last year were LINUX. This doesn't even include other Unices and their variants. I couldn't care less about the "moron" consumer. I am only interested in what is viable and feasible in a business environment. Windows NT on the desktop with a Linux/Unix server for Internet services and a Netware file server is by far the most stable and reliable architecture. Windows NT Server bites in an enterprise environment where communication between several different networks is required.

In short, Linux has its place - it's important that we recognize that. Right now its place is not on the desktop (although Red Hat and others are making great strides toward that end), and it's important to recognize that as well.

Later.

I don't understand why you need Whistler. The article indicates that the current build of Whistler is almost identical to Windows 2000, so why not go out and get 2000? If you are so hyped up on getting the latest software, then learn how to spell properly, grow up a little, and stop getting pirated materials. This will lead to a better chance of getting accepted to a beta team.
my 0.02 c3nts

Notice it is in alpha.
Products change dramtically between Alpha and final.
They change dramatically from beta1 to beta2, or beta 2 to beta3, etc...

Just because it is a lot like Win2k now, doesn't mean it will be later, in fact, it's a gaurentee that it won't be.

Notice how he said he wanted it NOW, not later. I know it will be different in the final product.

Help me locate it.............

Kid trust me your don't want it...
MS's beta's have more bugs in them then a dead tree. Just think how buggy an Alpha would be..Ugh!

I agree whole heartedly with JT_256's comments. I tested the developers release of Millennium and it was disaterous. Wait untill Whistler gets into the later stages of beta testing before trying it out. Besides, think how buggy thier release versions are, now do you really want to trust an Alpha release?

I disagree, it is probably only as buggy as the final release of Windows2000, because it has been built right off of it. Still though, it is not worth the download, not until it reaches the state that Memphis reached, it takes a bit of time.

I have used Windows 2000 in Beta 3 and had no problem and also tested Windows Millenium Build 2481 and also had notta problem so!! Umm NOW can some one tell me where I can get a copy of the OS!!!

I concure, Having using many beta's, even the first internal millennium with no startup screen, I dont really give a damn, my 34gig has enough unpartitioned space for a trial run!

What I really want though is the last version of "Neptune" maby even its sorce code, lol! (jokeing as I can't program, but I do want neptune)

If I can't get a copy I would also like a copy of Neptue Or even the next version of NT that make up WHISTLER I forget the name

Hey Jim if you find a copy of Neptune email me mrhack1@netzero.net.
I have been looking for the final copy that they made for weeks now.
Anyone know where to get a copy?
MrHack

Seeing as neptune's been canceled, why?