NT4 Workstation on 760CD: ideas, remarks, suggestions?

[schnitzelcore]

I'm still looking for the 'ideal' OS for my 760CD, I've tried:

* Windows 95
Pro's:
- Video out works
- It's really fast
- Sound should work (haven't really tried, see below)

Cons:
- Insecure (haven't had instability issues, actually)
- IRQ Hell when trying to get ethernet, video out, mpeg accel and sound working simultaneously
- Very obsolete, so really difficult to find usable apps

* Debian Etch
Pro's:
- Well, the usual for a fairly up-to-date linux distro: many apps, secure, flexible

Cons:
- Sound nearly and video out (+ mpeg) totally impossible to get working

So I'm thinking about giving NT4 a try, but have some questions.

- If I boot from NT4 install floppies, will they load drivers so I can continue the install from the cd-drive, or will I have to copy the i386 folder to the disk first?
- I want to install NT4 on an NTFS partition but I also want to use hibernation. Can I create two partitions: a small FAT one with the hibernation file and an NTFS one for NT4, is it possible to install and boot NT4 that way?
- If I use (g)parted to create the partitions, will NT4 be able to use an NTFS partition I've created with parted (I understand XP and Vista use newer versions of NTFS)? Or should I just leave a part of the disk empty and have the NT4 installer format it?
- There are drivers for NT4 on IBM's site, am I correct in thinking I will be able to use all the laptop's features using this OS?

The reason I want to have the drive partitioned right, before trying the install is because I just broke the connector in my drive caddy by removing and reinstalling the drive too many times and had to buy a new caddy.

[jdhurst]

NT4 Workstation is just about the most difficult to use Windows system Microsoft ever built. It has not got any tools to work well on a laptop (been there, done that). However, if you start the NT4 diskette set, it should prompt for the CD and go from there. That is how I built my NT4 Virtual machine. .... JDH

Followup note: If a machine of that vintage will run NT4, it will also likely run Windows 2000. Windows 2000 is vastly easier to use than NT4 and was much more adapted to laptops than NT4. Consider Windows 2000 in your search. ... JDH

[Stargate199]

I have run Windows 2000 on a 380ED with a 166Mhz Pentium and ~90 MB of ram, No Problems. Though 2000 is no longer supported, you still can find programs that will run on it. NT4 is another story. Never ran it, never will.

[Temetka]

NT4 Workstation has good memories for me.

I deployed hundreds of machines with that OS on it for the Navy back in 1996.

I actually really enjoyed using NT4, even much more so than Win95 and Win98.

My personal comp back in that day was a dual Pentium Pro 200MHz [censored]-kicker. It screamed with NT and 2000.

While I think 2000 is one of the best OS's Microsoft ever produced, I also will continue to sing high praises for NT 4.

[schnitzelcore]

I installed NT4 on a VMware virtual machine as a test. All did not go well.
I'm not behind a NAT router and was stupid enough to install NT4 on a VM with bridged networking. Had some Trojan backdoor eating my CPU before I knew it. Meh.

[Bookworm]

I have used NT4, and I never had any trouble with it. It will run MS Office 97 and afaik Works Suite 99, but I won't garantee that because I remember some encyclopedia or something not working. It's the fastest os you can use with an up to date web browser (ie 6).

There is a "Visual Update" for NT4 that converts the icons to XP style. It's not as complete an update as the Windows 98 Revolutions Pack, but not as dangerous either...

[Temetka]

I have been able to run Office 2000 on NT4 boxes in the past.

[jdhurst]

Same here. While I can (and did) make NT4 work well, Windows 2000 is just so much easier. It took me all of 8 hours to assess Windows 2000 once it was installed and adopt it wholeheartedly. ... JDH

[Temetka]

Don't get me wrong, Windows 2000 is an excellent version of windows. However I do not understand the retrospective viewpoint that a lot of users seem to have that NT4 was terrible. In my opinion NT4 was just as evolutionary as Windows 2000 and brought a lot of advancements to the table in it's own right and as such is deserving of a better reputation than it has now.

[RealBlackStuff]

The main problem with NT4 was its lack of USB support.
It was extremely solid and mostly installed on company computers.
I ran it at home for a while, but had to abandon it for lack of above-mentioned USB support.
I then switched to Windows 2000, which I used until early 2005, when I finally made the plunge into XP Pro.
BTW, my current install of XP-Pro dates from May 7, 2005!
Proof for me that XP is rock-solid.