Community Forums Archive

Go Back

Subject:Windows XP vs. 98
Posted by: SonicSounds
Date:11/19/2002 10:16:28 AM

Just curious if those that were having troubles in 98 are having any trouble after upgrading to XP. I just upgraded to XP and have all but eliminated most of the troubles I was having in 98. Here's a list of problems that were fixed after the upgrade:

When I pushed play in 98 Acid would freeze about 90% of the time.
Constant crackling using Audiophile 2496.
Computer would mysteriously shut off intermittently.
ASIO driver had extreme latency when recording audio.
Couldn't play old 3.0 files because of extreme stuttering and system lock up.

This is just a few of the problems I was having in 98. I just thought this might be a good FYI in case you had a similar problem. Acid in XP seems extremely stable. Was Acid 4.0 tested more exculsively with XP SoFo?

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: Iacobus
Date:11/19/2002 1:40:26 PM

I never had the chance to check out ACID 4.0 in Windows 98 SE because I upgraded to XP before then. ACID 3.0 worked fine for me under both OS's though. It was just faster under XP.

It doesn't surprise me that ACID 4.0, like everything else (except some legacy 9x/Me programs), would work better under XP, since that OS is NT-based. IMHO, I think we'd all be a lot better off if ACID 4.0 was XP-exclusive, à la Cubase SX. Sooner or later that'll probably happen.


Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: SonicSounds
Date:11/19/2002 1:56:01 PM

I get the impression that the program was meant to run under XP only. Sales wouldn't have been as strong if it were XP exclusive though. I guess they just slapped "Win 98 compatible" and called it a day.

It definitely runs faster in XP. I've had a couple of crashes but no persistent problems.

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: SonyNateM
Date:11/19/2002 2:20:31 PM

We did full testing of ACID under Win98SE and WinME for people still using 9x kernel-based versions of Windows. I was a part of this testing and didn't experience the troubles you describe. In fact, a good part of my testing took place under Win98SE and XP on a few different machines here. Of course, I also verified my findings and did testing using 2K, and ME, but 98SE definitely ran the gauntlet with a number of different setups.


Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: SonicSounds
Date:11/19/2002 3:51:59 PM

My theory is that the 98 I had on my computer needed to be reinstalled. It had been on my computer for a while and I've had various programs installed and uninstalled. Corrupted registry and a lot of other junk contributed to my problems also. I don't want SoFo to think it can rest on it's laurels but I am shocked at how smooth Acid is running right now. Like I said, I'm still having minor problems with playback on bigger songs (most likely due to my computer not being fast enough) but everything else is running well. I'm also glad I dumped the Audigy card. I thought I'd save some money buying that thing but it wasn't worth it. Creative has the worst driver support I've ever seen.

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: SonyNateM
Date:11/19/2002 4:36:37 PM

I'm glad you are up and running. As much as we all hate to admit it, a clean reinstall of an OS can fix many problems after you've tried everything you can think of. Personally, Symantec Ghost has solved all my problems in my home studio. I simply install XP, optimize, add everything I'm sure I'll need, make sure it's all working well. Then, I modify all the user paths in the registry to point to a tree of folders I created on my D: drive.

For those who are interested, the key to look in is:

HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Shell Folders

This allows me to route the system default folders to my other drive. I can preserve my Desktop, My Documents folders, even my Internet Explorer Favorites, History and Cookies if I choose to. (NOTE: I haven't tried ALL the shell folders, just the common ones. I don't know that changing them all will work without issue.) This way, if I break something, I can just ghost my good image back to the C: drive and I'm back where I want to be, with all the junk that has built up cleared out.

Granted, Whenever I add something permanantly to my setup, I have to add it to the ghost image as well. I keep a text doc on my desktop and make notes as I work as to the things I've changed that I want to keep. Then, next time I need to ghost, I restore my image, add/change the things from my notes, then rebuild my image quickly and I'm good to go.

Hope this helps,


Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: SonicSounds
Date:11/19/2002 5:12:56 PM

That's the sad part though. It's almost become an accepted fact that you have to reinstall your OS periodically (at least PCs). That's not the way it should be. I've had a G4 for the past 3 years and have never had to reinstall the OS. I've had countless PCs and I'm always reinstalling the OS.

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: salad
Date:11/19/2002 6:37:05 PM

Good point SonicSounds! It is REDICULOUS how this must be done more frequently than folks realize. I hear that this is NOT the case with Mac's.
Who was it that recently posted: "I would never use a PC on stage." (?)
Sure you can. As long as ya have about 3-4 of them hooked up as back ups. This would also give you something to SMASH at the end of the show.

I love my 2 PC's, but it's probably(as much as I hate to admit it:-) due to using a disc imaging program and Win XP. Symantec(Norton)Ghost is my weapon of choice too. I picked up Norton System Works Pro. 2002 for about 12 bucks from It contained GHOST & GoBack(by Roxio..Adaptec..Wildfire). Some of the other utilities seem "harmless", BUT "installer" BEWARE. The System Works application is questionable. I recommend only installing a few select utilities and ghost.

Now I can spend my time reading in forums like this one, about topics on the actual applicaton, insted of submitting questions like: "why all of a sudden this don't work, but it used to"...

Thanks for the registry/text doc tips Nate!

Happy cloning/imaging/Ghosting(Booo!)

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Date:11/19/2002 6:37:31 PM

sonic i just bought a new g4 with 4 protools cards after 3 years of enforced
pc exile and ive just remembered how much fun making music can be the difference is
astounding so smooth but no acid though but tdm plugs show how far behind acid is in terms of sophistication as much fun as looping is
oh and it works

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: antistar
Date:11/20/2002 6:40:52 AM

I mean it is no wonder that NIN, COIL and other electronic music artists use Mac to create music. It is just simply a better choice. Recently I had a G4 600MHz Powerbook for some days with Ableton Live on in, and I can tell you it was like heaven. I am so glad that I didn't buy a new PC yet as I'll definitly change to a PowerMAC G4 1,25 MHz, as if you consider a high end PC-Multimedia-Workstation you pay exactly the same money like if you'd buy a PowerMAC.

Macs have two main advantages:
1: the hardware is better optimized. A G4 has bigger high speed caches, which is the most important thing for multimedia calculations.

2: the OS MacOS-X (in its newest) version is optimized for multimedia, but still has the advantages of unix: full multiuser support, posix libraries, gcc. I really wonder why people are tormenting themselves with Microsofts Winloose?

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: SonicSounds
Date:11/20/2002 10:12:43 AM

I think the main factor is price. The high-end G4s run about $3500 and up. A comprable PC runs around $2500. I've had bad experiences with Macs too. I tried using Cubase and Logic on my brother's Mac and it was a nightmare. The MIDI implementation sucked (something with OMS) and the application didn't run smooth at all. Of course I was using an iMac but I wasn't too impressed. People think I'm nuts because I have a G4 (I'm a Graphic Designer) and I don't use it for music. That's my main everyday computer (surf the web, work, track bills, etc) and I'd rather not junk it up with even more software and then run the risk of something happening. I've got all of my graphic apps on the G4 and adding music software to that just complicates the whole situation. If I keep them separate, I feel a lot better. Maybe I'm nuts.

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: asopaque
Date:11/20/2002 11:50:05 AM

my bandmate recently saw Mark Isham and Nels Cline play in Los Angeles, using some interesting hardware and a Mac laptop. He's a PC person, and i'm both (graphic designer, too).

he felt for the band when their computer locked up on stage, but had to laugh in contrast with Apple's new ad campaign. the note in the email he sent me said....

"good to see exaclty how green the grass really is on the OTHER side".


Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: SonicSounds
Date:11/20/2002 11:53:16 AM

Exactly. Macs aren't immune to crashing and not working. The new ad campaign is pretty misleading.

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: antistar
Date:11/21/2002 6:42:52 AM

OK, if a program crashes and locks the user interface of a machine, with UNIX, also MacOS-X you can log in over network and kill the application, which crashed. But a program crash doesn't mean that the OS crashed. With the new MacOS you have both full multimedia support AND unix. And there is one more advantage which probably not many have realised: You can run your music applications under another user than the internet browser. So you don't have to fear that virusess can delete your projects, wavs, jpgs.

If Linux had the same multimedia features and programs like MacOS-X I'd change immediatelly to a PC with Linux. But all the sequencer applications for Linux i know have a very reduced sets of functions, that means unseable.

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: stusy
Date:11/21/2002 11:45:14 AM

I will NEVER go back to XP again...NEVER..!

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: decrink
Date:11/23/2002 2:37:56 AM

I was writing a paper, editing video, recording a megahit, surfing the web, checking my email, playing games, and cooking a turkey with my PC. Something happened and everything went wrong and I was too damn stupid to figure it out. My seven year old brother had an imac and he was able to write my paper, finish my video, record my song, surf, check email and play a games while finishing cooking the turkey.

I'm switching to Apple because they saved Thanksgiving for my family.

Besides that, I've had very few problems with XP, it runs for weeks at a time doing all kind of heavy video stuff and I've never reinstalled the OS and I reboot about once every two weeks. Except for a Vegas rendering problem now and then...

Subject:RE: Windows XP vs. 98
Reply by: waynegee
Date:11/23/2002 4:43:18 PM

a wise man once said "that Macs crash as much as Windows, they just do it with more style and prettier colors". Nuff said.

Go Back