>We have a few people here who have tried VFP applications on Win2k compared to previously running on NT. They say that Win2k is noticably slower (very noticably) but this conflicts with what I've heard that Win2k should be noticably faster than NT.
>
>Who's right here? We're close to pulling each others hair out here.
My understanding is that W2K needs more hardware than NT to run "well". RAM might have a large effect here. If you happen to be testing on a machine that has exactly 64 MB of RAM, that is plenty for NT but perhaps marginal for W2K. From what I have seen, best performance with W2K is with at least 96 to 128 MB of RAM.
Depending on what you're doing, you might also find that some drivers (especially video drivers) are not yet as well optimized for W2K as for NT.
Regards. Al
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." -- Isaac Asimov
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right." -- Isaac Asimov
Neither a despot, nor a doormat, be
Every app wants to be a database app when it grows up
