Atomic Systems

I am currently using WIN98SE to run MSTS on my home made AMD 2400+ 512mb, Nvidia MX400 64mb. I am having a lot of problems, crashes hangups etc especially SVR (1fps then crash! at Bewdley, about 5fps elsewhere!)

I was about to migrate to XP Professional, but have heard a number of tales of memory hungry xp killing everything, and have been advised that 2000 Professional would be better. Has anybody who has tried any of these any view of which is best? Not yet bought anything (other than the original WIN98SE!)

Tommy

2000 is basically not designed for playing games on, so I would steer clear of it. I run MSTS on XP with no problems at all, although I have seen people that have had problems. I believe a straight install of XP is better than trying to upgrade 98 to XP though, as it avoids a lot of problems. So back up all your stuff, wipe the disk and start from scratch.

I find XP solid as a rock. MSTS still falls over and gives Send/Dont Send now and then, but I rarely have to reboot XP because of it.

MSTS seems to run pretty well on XP Pro (which I use). I would imagine that 98SE causes a lot of the crashes that you describe, I know I struggled with it for about two years! MSTS is still a bit temperamental on my machine even now, although I guess that’s down to the fault of the program itself.

I lost my original install of Win98 on sunday night...(Doh...BooHoo 4 years old)...I have temp installed XP pro...and I have to say MSTS seems to run better...this could just be that it is a new install .
All Windows operating systems pickup a lot of rubbish through use, and are useless at getting rid of the clutter.
However a fresh install of Win98SE should be running fine for a few months....information from computer forums would suggest you are suffering from heat problems or a faulty power supply (AMDs) suck juice and you really want a 350-400W in there.
Failing that see if you can get the best drivers for your graphics card....that can make a big difference to frame rates.
Cheers
Jon

Windows 2000 runs everything! No problems at all and I would say that with Service Pack 4 available it is more stable than XP. Micro$oft ALWAYS release products before they're really ready and it always takes several service packs before things are right. Having worked with microsoft products for 14 years I have learned the hard way. End of the day it is your choice.

John

I upgraded from ME (Malevolent Edition) to XP Home Edition yesterday. Firing up MSTS was like setting off a big firework - I lit blue touch paper, waited for it to blow up in my face....and it worked fine. I even got about 2-4fps more than I was getting in ME. Haven't tried the editors yet, though.

jp4712 wrote:I upgraded from ME (Malevolent Edition) to XP Home Edition yesterday. Firing up MSTS was like setting off a big firework - I lit blue touch paper, waited for it to blow up in my face....and it worked fine. I even got about 2-4fps more than I was getting in ME. Haven't tried the editors yet, though.

You'll definetely get more FPS in XP than ME! Even 98 could get more fps than ME! ME does not know how to handle RAM properly!

Nope, that's not it. It's your video card. Stay away from MX stuff, it's dated and locks up peoples' comps, mine included. In fact the next card I get won't use NVIDIA drivers. I think I might splash out on a Radeon 9800 Pro card.

Paul

mikey2001 wrote:MSTS seems to run pretty well on XP Pro (which I use). I would imagine that 98SE causes a lot of the crashes that you describe, I know I struggled with it for about two years! MSTS is still a bit temperamental on my machine even now, although I guess that’s down to the fault of the program itself.

I have MSTS on a 98SE machine and an XP Pro machine and it works straight out of the box on the XP machine without having to stop anything - I am now a convert - just arranging the doubling of ram in the 98SE machine and will re-roll it out with XP Pro

I ran MSTS on XP Home for about 2 months, with no problems. I get the ocassional 'illegal operation' message (send/don't send it's called in this community I think), and an activity I downloaded for the default S+C crashes my PC (don't know why, I steer well clear of it though), but XP runs MSTS like a dream!

It will run almost as well on my own PC now hopefully, as I'll be putting XP on it too. However, last night the setup program, after 50-ish minutes of formatting my 120GB HDD, decided to stop working. It was taking 40 minutes to install a .dll file, with no CD drive activity, or HDD activity. Now I get some stupid error message on startup (tried 5 times to start setup again), but to no avail.

Still, when it DOES install properly (it better had do anyway!), I'll be running MSTS as well as before in XP.

Your choice what you go for though. I like the cool colours in XP, and hate having to use 2000 at university...

Thanks for all the advice. I will check the voltage on the PSU - there is a utility with the M/B which will log it, and Go for XP, I think, though I might sit back fro just a bit and see what happens. I could try changing the graphics card, but that will be expensive, especially if I land up changing the OS as well!!

Thanks again, now I will sit back and consider

Tommy

Hi there
I've tried 2000 Pro, XP and XP Pro with MSTS and although it has its limitations, I find that 98SE although somewhat lacking is the faster system and consequently better for MSTS. MSTS is of course very unstable and file checking is well worth while. You will also find that treating your machine to a good dose of Norton Disc Checking and defragging (version 4 is probably the best here - Norton that is) keeps your machine clean and less likely to fall over.

Windows 2000 runs everything! No problems at all and I would say that with Service Pack 4 available it is more stable than XP. Micro$oft ALWAYS release products before they're really ready and it always takes several service packs before things are right. Having worked with microsoft products for 14 years I have learned the hard way. End of the day it is your choice.

John,
you boys from East Wales,never want to try anything new.

I had the aptly named ME and XP was a huge improvement. Far more stable. A little plodding perhaps but the amount of times ME crashed, I got the feeling it was trying to do things too quickly.

That's where my technical expertise runs out

Still don't know what an FTP is. Felt tip pen at a guess

John FTP == File Transfer Protocol.

Right Operating System, I started out on windows 95 a while back. (upgraded to Windows 98 SE. One of the best moves I made. a very good Games based operating and general home use system.

I bought a Pc with Windows XP installed on it, I got virtually no Blue screen errors, (2years before I even got one and that was my fault too).

Windows ME, My sister had this operating System. And I definately would NOT recommend it. Even the Command prompt would not work correctly on this version of windows. It has to be the worst operating system I have ever seen. But my sister insisted that she couldn't afford to buy an upgrade so she struggled with it.
(More recently I have been informed that M$ abandoned the kernal program for this Windows version because it never operated correctly)

Windows XP, by far the most stable version of windows I have come accross. Though you may get the occasional "Send / Don't send" message the actual operating system recovers and keeps on going with just terminating that program.

Windows 2000, this OS I have never tried but I have been reliably informed that it is about as stable and works as well if not slightly better than the Windows XP, since it is more Network based.