Is there any reason to run Windows 2000 pro Sp4 nowadays on new systems?

[jediphx]

Just curious since for the most part xp sp2 is stable

 

[John]

Other than lower system requirements I have no idea why people still use if they have access to XP.

 

[ForumMaster]

well XP has slightly more features such as a built in firewall and a lot of wizards but apart from that, aren't they pretty similar? As John points out, W2k does have lower system requirements due to the classic interface rather then the fisher price gui of XP.

 

[soonerproud]

The biggest reason I can see to not use Win2k over XP is that MSFT has stopped supporting 2000. XP is slated to be supported for a number of more years making it more secure than 2k.

 

[GhettoFob]

Only if you have less than 512 RAM.

 

[VirtualLarry]

There are a couple of reasons. XP ships with modified mouse acceration curves, that gamers generally don't like. There are some regedit fixes for XP to deal with that issue, but W2K lacks the problem entirely.


There's also a reason, based on my own anecdotal experiences when you might want W2K instead of XP. On a 440BX system, with a P3 coppermine, and some ATA-33 (or higher) HDs on the 440BX's ATA-33 mobo controllers, and having a hardware serial-port modem - when running a disk defrag in the background, the serial ports are inaccessable. They just time out and do not respond. Either the serial port is not getting serviced/IRQs are getting blocked, OR, there is an issue with the bandwidth, on the 440BX chipset, in which the LPC I/O shares a bus internally with the IDE ports, and for some reason XP shedules IDE disk I/O back-to-back in such a way that the IDE port starves the serial port for bandwidth, in a way that W2K does not.

IOW, XP is borked on that class of hardware, and W2K is not, for some reason.

 

[jediphx]

So right now Win2k and Xp are just as secure until the security updates stop for win2k soon?

 

[Kadarin]

Fewer annoying balloon messages from applications in the taskbar.
Slightly faster.
NO PRODUCT ACTIVATION.
Compatible with most games/applications (except the ones Microsoft specifically breaks, like Rise of Legends).
Does almost everything that XP does.

 

[jediphx]

I installed 2K on my new dell E1505 dual core laptop and was glad to see it recognized both cores and seemed to run a lot quicker than XP and much less memory overhead. I guess im just worried about 2k being less secure than XP since I use my laptop for work a lot

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: jediphx
So right now Win2k and Xp are just as secure until the security updates stop for win2k soon?

1) Microsoft made security improvements with WinXP SP2 besides enabling the firewall by default. If you want some insight on how Win2000 v. WinXP SP2 pans out, check out this document, page 17, and look at the normalized pie charts. Compare Win2000 SP4 to Windows XP SP2. In each category, XP SP2 has significantly fewer infections.

2) Win2000 updates stop in 2011, IIRC, which I'm not sure qualifies as "soon"

I guess im just worried about 2k being less secure than XP since I use my laptop for work a lot

Here are some suggestions for Win2000:

1) Install and run the Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer and address the stuff it nails you for, including the Restrict Anonymous setting and weak/blank passwords.

2) use a software firewall and antivirus software

3) use the Secunia online checkup monthly or so

4) keep Automatic Updates on full automatic in the Control Panel.

5) If you use any Microsoft Office software, run your rig through the Office Update website repeatedly until it has all necessary Service Packs and updates.

6) I strongly suggest creating a new user account that will be your "daily-driver" account for web, email, IM, etc. After everything is set up, go to Control Panel > Users and Passwords and change your daily-driver account to a Restricted User account for exploit containment. Use your Administrator account ONLY when you need the Admin powers (installing hardware & software, for example).

7) be paranoid about installing stuff that isn't absolutely ironclad trustworthy.

8) install DirectX 9.0C and Windows Media Player 9.

 

[jediphx]

yeah sucks that wmp 10 wont work with win2k but i guess it wouldnt be a great loss, i always use winamp and the quintessential player anyways

 

[Canterwood]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
There are a couple of reasons. XP ships with modified mouse acceration curves, that gamers generally don't like. There are some regedit fixes for XP to deal with that issue, but W2K lacks the problem entirely.

Absolutely. :frown:

Thats one of the reasons it took me so long to switch over to XP.
MS really f*cked up with that and even the regedit doesn't solve the problem to my satisfaction.

Most new games have gotten round it now, but when I fire up some old Half Life multiplayer on a Lan game with the kids, I still have to write special codes in the shortcuts to make the mouse playable in XP.

As for security, well XP is better, but if you know how to use a system and protect yourself like Mechbgon has suggested, then 2K is still fine for daily useage.

It worked fine on my Opteron system and more recently my C2D system until I upgraded to XP x64.

 

[AllGamer]

Win2k SP4 is perfect for older machines, mostly those that are capable of Win98 but no WinXP, can run Win2k just fine at a decent speed.

 

[hans007]

2k and xp probably isnt much difference anyway.

if you take xp, run it in classic ui, turn off system restore , the firewall and all that garbage (which is what i do, and just manage my router settings well) you can make xp just as fast as 2k and still retain all the support.

they really aren't that different, which is why no one really was whining too much about xp being vastly different than 2k when it came out (after all it was only 2 years). the xp to 2k "under the hood" difference i think is much larger.