Well, I went ahead and installed win2k.
I had win98 installed on a Hitachi 6 gig drive. I wanted to be able to dual boot, so I wanted to install win2k into a separate partition. Used a freebee program called FIPS (http://www.igd.fhg.de/~aschaefe/fips/) and it split the disk right down the middle, slick as hell. (No damage to the win98 installation –just remember to defrag the drive before you try to partition it.)
My IO has 128 Meg installed and I use a D-Link DSB-650TX for a network adapter. I copied the i386 directory from the CD across the network to the newly created D drive using win98 and then executed winnt32 in the i386 directory. I have installed win2k many times, but always on a clean drive –never tried to dual boot it before. In the past he has always asked me which partition I wanted to install to, but this time he didn’t. Before I realized it, he was busy installing it on the C drive (where 98 is installed –different subdirectory, but same drive)
The installation took longer than I expected, but went without a hitch. He picked-up and installed drivers for the display (16bit 800X600) and the sound system. The D-link USB LAN adapter showed up in the “I don’t know what this is” category. I had downloaded the driver set for the adapter during the win98 installation –told him to upgrade the drivers and pointed him at the previously downloaded file. Wham, bam - they also worked for win2k. – WOW!
The console response speed seems about the same as win98 –have not tried any applications yet.
Win98 still boots—but I’m guessing that applications are going to step on each other. I’ll probably format the thing and start over. This time I’ll read a little closer and make sure that each operating system ends-up with it’s own disk. Right now they are both using the “program files” on C –that can’t be good. I mainly wanted to see if it would work. ---so far, so good.