poll: windows 2000 or windows xp?

[spanky]

so if u had to choose to install either one in your primary rig... which would u choose? i currently have windows 98 on my machine... and i am feeling i will need to finally upgrade soon. if u would like to increase your post count, please leave a brief explaination to your choice. thank you.

 

[BCYL]

win2k...

Upgraded to XP after it came out, just thought I would try it... didnt like it, too bloated... ended up going back to win2k now, and I'm sticking with it...

winXP is just win2k SP2 with a better looking GUI and added software (eg. the built-in burner).... But it eats up quite a bit more ram...

 

[Sluggo]

Honestly, I cant get used to either one of them.

I am tempted to go back to Windows 98. I just dont have the time or energy to investigate all of the features XP and Win2k have.

 

[zayened]

i use windows xp and have a lot of it tweaked out (from www.tweakxp.com). I have all the fancy gui stuff disabled and it is stable as all hell

 

[rutchtkim]

Hey what did I just tell you over IM?

spank: i think i'm going to install win2000 on a machine
spank: or should i do xp?
RUTchTKim: xp?
RUTchTKim: lol
spank: what's so funny?
RUTchTKim: xp crashes alot compared to 2000

 

[CKDragon]

WIN2K!

I had WinXP Pro installed for 4 months and it was much less stable on my 1700+/768 MB DDR rig with an EPoX KT266A mobo. I've been back on Win2K for the last 3 months and it's been rock solid.

With Win2K I've always been able to leave my computer running an infinite amount of time (longest was about 6 weeks, and then only because I was installing new software) without having to reboot but with WinXP I had to reboot every 4 days or so. It's not a big problem but when it freezes in the middle of something important it matters.

If you do decide to go with WinXP, be aware that the Blue Screen by default is disabled. The computer will simply restart with no error message. This confused the heck out of me because I was convinced there was a hardware issue so I upgraded the power supply because I thought that would cause random reboots. Later I found that it was a software-based problem and with any other windows OS I would've known it was software because there would have been a blue screen.

Hope some of this helped

CK

 

[rutchtkim]

OK i may be exaggerating, but I think 2000 is better for your purposes, XP, unless you choose to run it under the performance option, is too full-o crap

 

[Yossarian]

XP is Microsoft's most stable OS. What many people call "bloat" are options that are easily disabled, or reconfigured to look like they way you're used to. I really don't see a reason for Win2k at this point for a regular consumer-level system.

 

[her209]

xp cuz i want the most bug infested windows version on my computer.

 

[notfred]

still running win2k here.

 

[bigrash]

Go with XP

 

[spanky]

Originally posted by: rutchtkim
Hey what did I just tell you over IM?

spank: i think i'm going to install win2000 on a machine
spank: or should i do xp?
RUTchTKim: xp?
RUTchTKim: lol
spank: what's so funny?
RUTchTKim: xp crashes alot compared to 2000

i didn't even see that... i was too preoccupied with this:


RUTchTKim (1:04:12 AM): Outpost.com - HOT! - two Motorola T5200 two-way radios $23
spanky (1:06:02 AM): yeah i saw that
spanky (1:06:02 AM): hehe
RUTchTKim (1:06:11 AM): can u buy me one?
spanky (1:07:19 AM): u want me to seriously answer that?
RUTchTKim (1:07:23 AM): ill split the cost with u
spanky (1:07:55 AM): u can't fool me
RUTchTKim (1:08:26 AM): arg


decisions, decisions... this poll is a close one...

 

[Evadman]

I have to go with XP for the price difference.

I have XP prof on one system, and 2000 on the others. ( winME on 2, don't kill me )

I have not noticed any problems with XP over 2000, or the other way around.

 

[SHoddyCOmp]

XP Pro. Im gonna use it on the computer Im ordering....tommorow? ...I think.

 

[psteng19]

XP looking like 2000 (by disabling the ugly interface).

Doesn't XP have more native support for hardware?
Unless the SP's of 2000 took care of it (didn't use 2000 much).

Anyway, the only bad things about XP are:
requires more memory.
doesn't support all software (then again, if XP doesn't support it, then 2000 most likely won't either).

 

[spanky]

which os would u say is more stable? and how much more of a memory hog is xp than 2000?

 

[bmacd]

i legitimately own 5 copies of win XP pro, and have one *cough* copy *cough* of win2k. I had xp installed for a couple months before i made the right switch to win2k. Never going back to XP unless it comes with a vietnamese woman willing to fulfill my operating system needs

-=bmacd=-

 

[pillage2001]

Windows 2000 my friend. I was skeptical about going to win2k from 98se too. Thought I wouldn't like it but I'm loving it everyday. Never liked Xp since the first day it came out. Too bloated and the colors drove me crazy.

 

[slikmunks]

xp... i had 2k, then i tried xp, and it was cool... doesn't seem too crazy bloated to me....

 

[Maleficus]

2K all the way

 

[Scootin159]

Why not XP? How's it extra bloated? Seems to run just as fast as 2000 did for me.

 

[dighn]

xp

2000's boot time really ticked me off

 

[dakata24]

2k.

 

[BCYL]

Originally posted by: dighn
xp

2000's boot time really ticked me off

I get very similar boot times between XP and 2k...

besides, who cares about boot time when you can run your machine for months without rebooting?

 

[Stratum9]

Win2k if you are into gaming. I keep hearing so many people complaining about getting games to run on XP. With Win2k I can run just about any game unless it's older and even then I can usualy get it to work. Wait awhile for XP.