Finally gave WinXP at try... ME NO LIKE IT!

[shabby]

I took off xp too and reinstalled win2000.
Theres a bunch of stuff that i disliked too, it was slower than win2000 even with skinning turned off. IE6 was a lot slower than ie5, it didnt remember my folder options, i had to click on view>list everytime i opened up a folder. It loaded faster, ill give it that.

 

[CrackRabbit]

I love the backwards compatibility modes, i was able to play games that i havent been able to play for several years! And its just as stable as 2k, if not more so, XP has only BSOD twice on me, and that was because a memory stick was dying!
I think microsoft got it just about right with XP, ok maybe except the interface (and i wouldnt go as far as to call it fugly either). But if XP isnt for you thats fine, there will be another MS-OS released in a year and a half, you can count on it, you can upgrade to that!


CrackRabbit

 

[Ringer]

Blah!.......Can't play Barbie Hairstyler on it.....What good is an OS when one can't play Barbie software?

 

[iGod]

I'm using WinXP Pro right now... it ran slow as hell until I downloaded all of the critical updates. It's running pretty good right now. The only reasons that I'm keeping it is because the visual styles, and the text is niiiice. *pets ClearType*

 

[MasterHoss]

I like it (pretty much) except for the fact that every time I restart my computer and let MBM run in my system tray, I have to always let Windows know I want both the mobo and cpu temp shown AT ALL TIMES. I just don't like that... I also don't like the fact that some driver for some component in my box isn't releasing 100% of the time--which leads to my system not always shutting down or restarting. The final thing that gets to me is the fact that I am suffering from the no CD Text problem experienced by a lot of WinXP users.

 

[AGodspeed]

WinXP works great for me.

1. Stable: the most stable OS I've ever had.
2. Fast: great performance in games and apps in general.
3. Friendly: from icons, to setup, to utilities and other built-in programs, everything is great.
4. Compatible: so far, no compatibility conflicts or driver issues, which is great!

I love it.

 

[Amused]

I don't know why anybody says 2K is faster. For me, with all of the visual "slides and fades" turned off, XP is faster. Not only that, but it runs my games not only MUCH faster than 2K, but faster than 98SE.

I also like the visual style of XP, but not in blue. Silver is MUCH better.

 

[RaiderJ]

I think there is a "growing pain" period for any OS. I used 98 for quite a while after 2k was released, simply because things weren't as supported as I would have liked. I think many of the improvement from 2k to xp are largely cosmetic, which is more important to some. I'm currently using 2k on my main machine, but I'm seriously considering installing xp on it once I reformat.

For me, my main gripe w/ XP is the hassle I have to go through to allow others on my network to access my machine, or to share my printer with others. What a pain! At least XP lets you share without all the hassles over a local network!

BTW, does anyone know how to let 2k share over a network w/o all the passwords and account? Is it just impossible?

 

[esc]

XP is simply the most stable OS I've ever used.

 

[Grommet5]

<<CDRwin 4.0a... keep getting media error!?! Also can't use NAV 7.5 CE!>>

I prefer Nero, as it think its a much better cdwriting app, also, i have had no problems running the latest Norton antivirus 2002.

 

[johndoe52]

It gave me a nice boast in performance. Once I changed all the settings so it doesn't look all cartoonish it isn't that bad. It's gonna take some getting used to though. It's a pain finding updates so I can use all the apps that i'm used to.

 

[Richard98]

<< BTW, does anyone know how to let 2k share over a network w/o all the passwords and account? Is it just impossible? >>



If you want 2k to behave like win98 and aren't concerned with security, just allow full Guest Priviliges under computer management==>users and groups. You also have to set up a "share" for each drive.

 

[MadRat]

<<If you want 2k to behave like win98 and aren't concerned with security, just allow full Guest Priviliges under computer management==>users and groups.>>

There is a way to allow plain text passwords, too. (Its like what you have to do for Samba servers.) Its more difficult to get that initial share working going from a Win XP machine back to a Win 98 machine. For some reason Microsoft decided to make you manually map out shares from non-Win2000/XP machines. We all really took advantage of the old Workgroup model that automatically sought out the shares.

<<You also have to set up a "share" for each drive.>>

Actually for each partition, not drive. I am just poking fun at your semantics, not trying to be mean.

 

[Alex]

hmmm i like the neutrality of your post

its true though, as much as i totally adore it, i loath the day i installed it cuz i cant use open gl even with the latest leaked viper2 drivers...

 

[genius19]

I did the same thing. WinXP caused lots of problems. Win2k is MS most stable OS by far. Also XPs interface is easier to use if you are experienced, but users that are famaliar with 95 or 98 will have a lot to get used to. One thing I did like is a home OS with NTFS, VFAT partitions are nowhere near stable.

Windows XP is a good OS for consumers that have hardware tailored to work with XP, although win2k is my choice if someone is considering a new OS. THey brought back the MSCONFIG and SFC utilities, which i really miss in windows 2000, but as for stability and user group management, 2k will blow XP away. As far as multimedia, XP does a great job with integrated software, but 2000 is not that far behind them.

Im Out

 

[WHATif]

OS-X