XP Pro/Home or 2000 for Studio Machine
ramtazz
another box. Which OS do you think is better for studio work.
Win 2000
Win XP Pro
Win XP Home (I hope not!)
Programs mostly used and will need to be upgraded (ugggh)
Cakewalk Pro 9 (Sonar no doubt)
Reason
Samplitude
Sound Forge 5 to Audition
Gigastudio
Networked to LAN
The New Box is a
1.4 P4 512mb ram 80gb hdd
Thanks in advance.
Bill
P.S. No flame wars just a simple question.
Ethan Winer
> Win 2000
> Win XP Pro
> Win XP Home (I hope not!)
I'd definitely go with Windows XP over Windows 2000, either Pro or Home
versions. I use Pro but I've set up many computers for friends with Home and
it works just as well for anything musicians are likely to need.
--Ethan
Mark Stevens
"ramtazz" <Ram...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:7vsse09jo92pu5om3...@4ax.com...
Win Xp Home is fine for studio work, been usuing it for nearly 3 years now
with no problems.
Win Xp Pro has loads of other stuff in it which you are unlikely to so save
the money and get Home edition. What you save can be put towards other music
kit.
All the programs you have mentioned should work ok under Xp too.
Regards......Mark
BlueWaveStudios.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.716 / Virus Database: 472 - Release Date: 05/07/2004
Chris Newman
pretty reliable, particularly after being tweaked according to Dave Casey's
excellent suggestions on the Tascam website, but XP Home is another story
altogether. Since installation it has NEVER blinked, let alone crashed.
I have XP Pro on another computer (not music related) and it too is very
stable, but personally I think the extra bits are irrelevant for a studio
PC.
I was very loathe to change our systems as they all worked, but had no
choice when I bought the new Sound Forge and Vegas packages as they don't
work at all on 98. Anyway, my fears were groundless and XP really is very
good.
Good luck!
Chris Newman
"Mark Stevens" <nos...@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:ccmpm6$d39$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
John Miller
dual processors.
Since you have a P4, the processor can do hyperthreading - a kind of poor
man's multi-processor - and is supported by Home.
For a definitive comparison, go to
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/choosing2.mspx
(Personally, I'd choose Pro, though!)
John.
"ramtazz" <Ram...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:7vsse09jo92pu5om3...@4ax.com...
Stephen Goodman
news:10f048r...@corp.supernews.com...
> The only real benefit of Pro over Home would be if you ever decide to use
> dual processors.
And of course there's the additional question of whether ones' applications
need or support two processors.
> Since you have a P4, the processor can do hyperthreading - a kind of poor
> man's multi-processor - and is supported by Home.
>
> For a definitive comparison, go to
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/choosing2.mspx
A very helpful guide - from which I glean the following:
If you've got a home network (which can be anything from a pair of PCs with
a router/modem to more PCs and a server), you should have the Pro version of
XP. Items you'd want in the event of any networking or sharing would
include the Encrypting File System and Access Control (especially if you're
using an ADSL/etc router-modem to access Das Infobahn!).
> (Personally, I'd choose Pro, though!)
> "ramtazz" <Ram...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:7vsse09jo92pu5om3...@4ax.com...
> > I am upgrading the machine in my studio. I have Win 98SE currently on
> > another box. Which OS do you think is better for studio work.
> >
> > Win 2000
> > Win XP Pro
> > Win XP Home (I hope not!)
I've been using 2000 Pro at home on a pair of PCs for some time now. I was
initially attracted to it because of the good words of video and audio
editing people who were running on it at work (I'm a Premiere/VideoWave/Cool
Edit Pro user myself), and stayed because the early revisions of XP I was
encountering in consulting didn't impress. After a few years though I have
to echo the statements above regarding XP's self-maintenance and
crash-prevention, and say that, once it's set up right, XP just goes and
goes and goes.
The only negative I've encountered in the case of 2000 is its absence of
default support for the newer ATA/EIDE drives. When installing a WD200
drive in my wife's machine (the BIOS and the rest of the hardware support
and recognise the drive), it was necessary to disconnect the power from all
other hard drives in the unit, as it would default install to the secondary
drive(s) otherwise! This despite upgrading to SP4. It reminded me of the
old Phoenix BIOS days, where one would be caught in a bind if the floppy
drive was having a problem during installation of any other new component,
and for a short while I actually wished for dip switches again. [shudder]
End result being that, when the only Blue Screen O'Death appeared (as a
result of the driver for the drive itself becoming corrupt!), I had to have
both the emergency disk and the driver disk handy, and a quick finger on the
F6 key, and... blah blah woof woof.
> > Programs mostly used and will need to be upgraded (ugggh)
> > Cakewalk Pro 9 (Sonar no doubt)
> > Reason
> > Samplitude
> > Sound Forge 5 to Audition
> > Gigastudio
I'd check with the software manufacturer in question about their own apps
support for XP, but for the most part I think they're all fairly safe to go
to XP. I've understood that the old workhorse I know and love, Cool Edit
Pro, was sucked into the Adobe vortex, then renamed and given a whole load
of bugs for users to try to cope with. Shame really, though I admit a
little sour grapes at not having been picked up on the Beta team by Adobe,
despite beta-testing CEPro since, uh, 1996.
> > Networked to LAN
This aspect would affect whether or not you want file-sharing and greater
security on that level - which XP Home doesn't really provide.
> > The New Box is a
> > 1.4 P4 512mb ram 80gb hdd
So yes, here's an additional vote for XP Pro. Good luck and keep 'em
flying!
--
Stephen Goodman
* Cartoons about DVDs and stuff
* http://www.earthlight.net/HiddenTrack
* (with links to Medialine)
Laurence Payne
<earthl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>If you've got a home network (which can be anything from a pair of PCs with
>a router/modem to more PCs and a server), you should have the Pro version of
>XP. Items you'd want in the event of any networking or sharing would
>include the Encrypting File System and Access Control (especially if you're
>using an ADSL/etc router-modem to access Das Infobahn!).
>
>> (Personally, I'd choose Pro, though!)
I think you'll find the extra networking stuff in XP Pro more angled
at protecting users on a large network from each other. Protection
from the outside world will be handled by a separate firewall on each
machine, and by firewall functions within a modem/router.
CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect
Stephen Goodman
"Laurence Payne" <l...@laurenceDELETEpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:csr2f0hnr0vtq5mtn...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 17:27:17 +0100, "Stephen Goodman"
> <earthl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >If you've got a home network (which can be anything from a pair of PCs
with
> >a router/modem to more PCs and a server), you should have the Pro version
of
> >XP. Items you'd want in the event of any networking or sharing would
> >include the Encrypting File System and Access Control (especially if
you're
> >using an ADSL/etc router-modem to access Das Infobahn!).
> >
> >> (Personally, I'd choose Pro, though!)
>
> I think you'll find the extra networking stuff in XP Pro more angled
> at protecting users on a large network from each other. Protection
> from the outside world will be handled by a separate firewall on each
> machine, and by firewall functions within a modem/router.
A bit like wearing a raincoat AND a condom, just in case, though isn't it?
In any event if you didn't want anyone to see given folders, you don't have
much of a choice as XP Home doesn't offer that feature. Anyhoo, ever tried
to record anything while a software firewall is running on their machine?
Pleah! :P
Laurence Payne
<earthl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I think you'll find the extra networking stuff in XP Pro more angled
>> at protecting users on a large network from each other. Protection
>> from the outside world will be handled by a separate firewall on each
>> machine, and by firewall functions within a modem/router.
>
>A bit like wearing a raincoat AND a condom, just in case, though isn't it?
>In any event if you didn't want anyone to see given folders, you don't have
>much of a choice as XP Home doesn't offer that feature. Anyhoo, ever tried
>to record anything while a software firewall is running on their machine?
>Pleah! :P
The firewall in your router blocks vulnerable ports. It's there -
you might as well use it :-)
A computer-based one can do much more. Partly because it can be
constantly updated as new threats emerge.
Yes, raincoat, condom AND gum-boots. Plus anything else available.
It's a jungle out there :-)
What's your problem with recording over a running firewall? I quite
agree, it's good practice to turn all unnecessary processes off while
recording, especially ones that might see it as their mission to
virus-check any new file they see on the computer. Before
recording, I disable my network port, turn off Norton Firewall and
Anti-Virus, and advise others to do the same.
Except......often I forget :-) And, you know what? It doesn't
actually make a jot of difference! My 2GB of RAM is stuffed with
sample data for VST instruments and the like, I'm playing loads of
audio tracks and recording more. Merrily giving the computer a fair
old work-out - and I've forgotten to take it off the Internet and turn
off the protection utilities.
With today's powerful machines, I am alternately surprised by how
much, seemingly effortlessly, my computers will do; and then by how
some apparently simple task completely floors them :-)
Not unlike my prowess as a musician. Some days I effortlessly play
the most complex passages - on playback it's "Cor! Was that me?!".
Other days I can't manage a simple scale without a dozen "takes" :-(