HD to NTFS -> WinXP Home vs. Pro - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Windows / PC Post Production Solutions > Non-Linear Editing on the PC

Non-Linear Editing on the PC
Discussing the editing of all formats with Matrox, Pinnacle and more.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 6th, 2003, 11:42 AM   #16
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 1,929
Using Win 2K here. Not a single OS crash or hang in 3 years. Have left computers running months a time.
__________________
All the best,
Robert K S

Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors
Robert Knecht Schmidt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 12:01 PM   #17
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,315
Robert... nice to see other Win 2k users are getting the same ultra-reliable use out of their OS. Bet no Mac user can say they haven't crashed in 3 years, eh?

But let's not let that pit of vipers loose in this thread!
Imran Zaidi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 12:22 PM   #18
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 148
Just for the "authoritative" answer on proc support, here goes:

For normal (non-hyperthreaded processors):

Win2k Pro supports up to 2 processors.
XP Home supports 1 processor only.
XP Pro supports up to 2 processors.

For Hyper-Threaded processors:

Win2k Pro will support both threads, viewed as 2 processors. Since Win2k does not have HT optimization, it will not work with 2 physical HT processors when HT is on, (since that would be 4 "processors"), you would have to run HT off. HT on Win2k is not technically supported by Intel or Microsoft, but will work.

XP Home supports both threads of a single HT processor. It will look like dual processing.

XP Pro supports both threads of up to 2 HT processors. With one HT processor it will look like 2, and with 2 physical processors it will look like 4.

If you use XP with HT, it is highly recommended that you update to XPSP1.

Also notably, HT only works when you build Windows in ACPI mode. If this means nothing to you, don't worry about it, but it might tee off some hardcore sound guys.
Brian M. Dickman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 01:07 PM   #19
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,315
Also, just as an extra tidbit of important information...

While the OS you use may support multiple processors, the actual real-world usage of both your processors will depend on your specific software. Some software applications are not optimized to take advantage of multiple processing, while others are. Sometimes this type of better programming is what accounts for price differences between pro software and not-so-pro software.

However, general OS functionality will work at the highest level supported by your OS, resulting in overall increased performance.
Imran Zaidi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 02:09 PM   #20
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
I use Vegas Video 3 which supports SMP. My realized speed increase during rendering with hyperthreading is about 10%. Hyperthreading has a potential speed increase of no more than 20-25%.
Bill Ravens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 08:51 PM   #21
RED Code Chef
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
Here is another vote for Windows 2000 Professional. I have been
using it for a couple of years as well and have only had a couple
of minor problems. I use it for everything stable that I need
(my programming and video work). Really like it. My XP machine
that I use for various things feels less stable, especially with
video work. That might just be me ofcourse.
__________________

Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com
DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef

Join the DV Challenge | Lady X

Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors
Rob Lohman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 09:17 PM   #22
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 429
Forgot to mention that I'd probably still be on W2K (my other machines are except for a BSD one) if it wasn't for the Avid Xpress DV 3.5 requirement: XP only.
Christopher Go is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 09:38 PM   #23
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 1,929
"nice to see other Win 2k users are getting the same ultra-reliable use out of their OS. Bet no Mac user can say they haven't crashed in 3 years, eh?"

I don't deal with Macs a lot. Personally, I can only recall one or two occasions when I used a Mac without hanging it. I guess I'm just cursed. Probably OS X is much improved over previous releases.

Mac or PC, it's amazing to think that you can let a computer run for several years without crashing--that a processor can run trillions and trillions of cycles, racking up the probability of failure closer and closer to certainty, almost as if defying statistics. It's testament to the field of computer engineering; we've come a long way from the days when Mauchly & Eckert had to hunt down a couple bad vacuum tubes in the ENIAC every day.

So yes, Win 2K is my preferred desktop OS. It's mature and stable and well-supported and versatile. However, I would never recommend Windows for internet server applications. It's not secure, and shows little immunity to hacks and worms. For servers I use OpenBSD, which happens to be ported to many different hardware types, both PCs and Macs.

I can't think of a good reason why Avid would write their software to run on XP but not 2K. Ditto with Corel's new release (11), which I would use (on the PC I find it much more nimble and stable vs. Adobe's Photoshop & Illustrator) if it ran on my OS. What about XP do these packages exploit? Or is lack of compatibility a marketing decision alone?

With regards to everyone's just complaints about XP's troublesome authentication: I too am concerned about convenience, privacy, anonymity, consumer's rights, etc., and the trend of obligatory software registration (and web site registration, for that matter) really looks to be getting out of hand, Microsoft being particularly guilty of data collection. (Running a firewall like ZoneAlarm is useful for watchdogging which programs attempt to access the internet or hijack server rights.) Luckily for all of us, total abandonment of Microsoft is daily a less impracticable target. In 2003 the open source movement looks to be vast, swift, and robust. I have a feeling that all the software that costs thousands of dollars in 2003 will be free and manipulatable in 2013. This is, for the most part, already true of operating systems, servers, office applications, graphics and audio standards, and simple graphics editing packages; soon it will probably also hold for larger video editing, compositing, and 3d modeling/rendering packages.

If I were Microsoft and I wanted to retain the policy of declining to take the Windows codebase open source, I would probably see two ways of maintaining hegemony in the face of the open source movement: (1) use engineering/R&D muscle to keep the OS and other programs on the cutting edge of technology, and cooperate (collude?!) with hardware manufacturers to allow Windows to take maximum advantage of processor advances (of which SMP and HT are good examples); and/or (2) use marketing muscle to exclusify products and services to Microsoft's platforms (.NET and the DRM of Windows Media 9 are good examples of this). Microsoft will doom itself in the eyes of discriminating consumers (read: computer geeks) if it puts more focus on the latter than the former (the Slashdot community is a good example of this).

But I'm rambling and off-topic. If I were wrangler of this forum I'd split off a new thread, "Utopian Software Theory"...
__________________
All the best,
Robert K S

Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors
Robert Knecht Schmidt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 10:23 PM   #24
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
Nice read RKS. You may, hopefully, be right. There are, however, some market pressures you left out of your writing.

1-Remember when Radio Shack introduced the first desktop computer? It was a MAC. Why wasn't it as successful as the johnny come lately PC? Simply because Steve Jobs kept the SDK's as proprietary Apple info, so no third party could write apps without paying for a license. Is M$ now faced with the same dilemma on a more limited scale? ie Open source vs. M$ controlled?

2-Like it or not, M$ will eventually (read: soon) drop support for w2k. Of course, there will always be hangers on...how many people still use Windoze ME, or 98? If they only new what they were missing, eh? As the media apps get more and more developed, they will support WXP, exclusively. There will be no market for w2000. Face it, the people who won't pay for an OS upgrade, won't shell out the $$$'s for new software, anyway.

3-The video editting population is probably a little more technically saavy than the average Joe Consumer. The average Joe C. is still running Windoze 95!! It's so sad it's actually pitiful. They will never know the difference, anyway.

4-We live in a capitalistic society where success is measured in increasing GNP and annual profit statement. Where's the profit motive in open source? Utopian, methinks. Why aren't more commercial apps written to support Open source? No market, no profit motive. Without frontline apps, Open source will always be relegated to serverdom.

5-Bill Gates and M$ are not THAT dumb. Dumb enough to try for .NET...smart enough to try to stack the deck in their favor. I grew up beleiving in the White Hat always wins over the black hat philosophy. I'm not so sure that it's a practical beleif system I had.

6-The true facts are that ALL of the spyware that M$ has loaded into wXP can be easily defeated. Open source software like XP-Antispy really simplify the registry mods for those not daring enuff to venture into the registry. Product validation is simple aanonymous, and innocuous, albeit a damn nuisance.
Bill Ravens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 10:55 PM   #25
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Posts: 220
Hi Scott,

all have expounded the virtues of XP Pro and the file limit size of NTFS is an obvious good reason for change.

However, I have a post in the Canopus forum where I question the speed of NTFS. I am running W2k and since converting my drives to NTFS have seen a 25% drop in disk speed according to Raptest. I must confess that it is an upgrade fro 98SE so may not be that efficient. Will try a clean install soon to see if it make a difference. Would be curious to see how your drive speed checks out, before and after.

The concencus seems to be that NTFS is faster, this is not my experience.

Cheers
Andrew
__________________
PAL XL-1, DV Raptor, Premiere

TOTAL AMATEUR - DOING IT FOR THE FUN
Andrew Leigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 11:12 PM   #26
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 200
There have been numerous benchmarks that show that usually FAT32 is faster under NT/W2K/XP than NTFS. NTFS is far more reliable and scalable and robust, but that all comes with a slight amount of overhead. That being said I have been using NTFS for years, never had a bad or corrput disk cluster due to the journaling/logging of NTFS even when the OS does crash on occasion. Remember the days of lost or bad clusters in FAT, that carries over to FAT32, although not as common. The performance differnce between the 2 should be negligible with todays fast systems and disks.
Keith Luken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 11:21 PM   #27
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,315
You will also see that a clean install of an NTFS system will be light years faster than an 'upgraded' version, that was upgraded from Fat32 to NTFS. Upgraded OSes are always slower than a cleanly installed one.
Imran Zaidi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2003, 11:31 PM   #28
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Cupertino, California, USA
Posts: 301
Yeah I was planning on doing a clean install. Getting a new HD and installing to that and then transferring my files over to the new HD. The only down side to doing it this way is that you have to reinstall all your software. But that's OK, I like starting fresh every so often on my computer. And thanks to all for the great suggestions and advice. I am sure these posts will be of use to many other people than just me. Thanks!
__________________
Scott Silverman
Shining Star Digital Video Productions
Bay Area, CA
Scott Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2003, 12:22 AM   #29
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Posts: 220
Hi,

O.K. this is is starting to make more sense. I was confused by a statement that NTFS is "much faster". I was unable to get my drives faster when I converted now I know why. I can trade a bit of speed for stability.

I have on the occasion had crosslinked files, will NTFS help remove this problem?

Cheers
Andrew
__________________
PAL XL-1, DV Raptor, Premiere

TOTAL AMATEUR - DOING IT FOR THE FUN
Andrew Leigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7th, 2003, 08:47 AM   #30
RED Code Chef
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
Andrew,

Indeed. With NTFS you should not have any more cross linked
files. Or lost clusters (files/directories). Or corrupt files if your
computer decides to crash (yes, this can still happen, especially
with buggy drivers)...

NTFS is meant to be more stable. I've never seen a problem
with NTFS in the years that I'm using it now. Ofcourse I've had
problems with the OS or programs (that might corrupt a file) but
never with the filesystem any longer!
__________________

Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com
DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef

Join the DV Challenge | Lady X

Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors
Rob Lohman is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Windows / PC Post Production Solutions > Non-Linear Editing on the PC

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:15 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network