Login to Account Create an Account
Still running Windows NT..?
Posted 20 November 2009 - 08:29 PM
Recently I had to set up an NT box for a client running legacy accounts software, and was shocked at the blistering performance. On throwaway Pentium III hardware Seamonkey was snappier than Firefox on my 1.5GHz Celeron running XP. Boot times, window management etc. all seemed instant.
Is anyone still running it, esp. on newer hardware? What are has been your experience?
Posted 23 November 2009 - 10:21 AM
I like keeping old OS's handy in case I get a call that starts with "I have this PC that's running *insert old OS here* that's giving us a problem..."
Posted 23 November 2009 - 10:37 AM
(or maybe 2 ) I have both a machine (JFYI working 24/7 since 2001 without ANY reinstall and with an average of three reboots per year - due to updates/servicing ) AND a VM with it for the same reasons TheReasonIFail explained.
Edited by jaclaz, 23 November 2009 - 10:38 AM.
Broken link on MSFN? You may try this. Looking for SEARCH on MSFN? Click here.
Posted 23 November 2009 - 08:05 PM
Posted 27 November 2009 - 10:33 AM
Out of all windozes, old NT4 is still the slickest and fastest OS.
Posted 04 December 2009 - 02:20 PM
I have installed windows nt 4.0 few days ago on my old k6-2 400mhz.
Unfortunally windows nt 4.0 only support flash player 7, MSN Messenger 5 (no photos, but you can use Miranda IM), Internet Explorer 6 or Firefox 2.x
I like this OS.
Posted 07 December 2009 - 03:55 PM
Posted 13 December 2009 - 08:43 PM
Posted 26 December 2009 - 01:58 AM
I would still use it if it supports USB and wireless
Both USB1.1 and 2.0 work fine on NT4 (just not OOB).
"Wireless" has never been any problem and it is a non-issue.
Since it is networking (from an OS point-of-view, there is no difference between wired and wireless network connection) hence NT4 always had support for "wireless".
But I know what you meant - that many manufacturers chose not to make NT4 drivers for their hardware, and that is a shame indeed (and may be a problem).
Posted 27 January 2010 - 06:23 PM
It's still got the original installation it had years ago, as I've NEVER needed to re-install it.
The machine was on 24/7 for a good couple of years and was only rebooted due to updates etc. but the machine has now been powered down due to a recent house move.
Posted 29 June 2013 - 12:58 PM
Windows NT4 supports flash player 184.108.40.206 when using IE6. If you use Firefox 220.127.116.11, Seamonkey 1.1.18 or K-meleon 1.5.3, NT4 supports flash player 18.104.22.168 as the latest version. I agree that NT4 is fast and stable I run it on an IBM netvista 8311 with a P4 2.53GHZ, 1GB ram and onboard ethernet and video. It dual boots with 98SE (RP9, KernelEX)
Need some help here. I would really like to have the latest version of flash (god how I hate flash!) on my latest version of Firefox (22.214.171.124) that I have running on my Windows NT 4.0 system. So I just did a search for "flash player 126.96.36.199" and found this place: http://www.oldversio...layer-9-0-47-0. And I downloaded a file from there called "flashplayer9r47_win.exe". So if I run that file, I will have updated the flash version for my Firefox browser to this version you claim is the latest version of flash it can handle? Even though Adobe claims latest version of flash you can have on Windows NT is version 7. And even though the download page I just specified does not list Windows NT as an operating system that this version of flash "Works on". It would be nice if I could have some way to verify this file is not going to corrupt my computer or something, like a hash code of the true original file that I could check this file I downloaded against (I just recently downloaded a little program that calculates these things). That specific version isn't available on the Adobe site as far as I know.
Also, I just ran R62200.exe that someone else on the thread mentioned, to try to get the USB ports on my machine working under Windows NT 4.0. And it installed fine and everything, but the main reason I wanted to get the USB ports working is so that I can do scans on my scanner from there, but my scanner continues to not work. The R62200.exe file only loaded certain specific drivers, sigh. But I do have the CD that came with my scanner, but guess what? When I go to the part of the CD that installs drivers, if I run it on my Windows NT computer, it stops right there and says I need to be running Windows 98 or Windows 2000, sigh. So I wonder if I can still get this to work. They didn't create a driver for Windows NT because that OS never officially supported USB. But I wonder if I could just use the Windows 2000 driver or something like that.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users