What are the legitimate and verified advantages of WinXP over Win2k?

[Concillian]

I've been using Win2k for years. It was a huge improvement over Win98SE. Later, WinXP came out and I could never really see a reason to switch to it.

I have upgraded my 2 computers several times over the years, but continute to use Win2k because I see no reason to use XP.
I mean:
- I'm able to play games and get comparable framerates to Win XP users in my experience
- I'm able to browse the web and interface with what I need to (network or direct cable)
- I'm behind a Linux box as a router as well as a normal off the shelf router thing, so security is largely a non issue (and recent Adaware SE scans seem to verify this, no significant malware in 2 years since my last full wipe and reinstall)

I understand I can't use the latest media player with WinXP, but that is of little concern to me, I appear to be able to play everything I've tried that is linked on websites, and MP3-wise I almost exclusively use my squeezebox or the associated softsqueeze software to browse my MP3s or connect to shoutcast.

What exact advantages does Windows XP offer? Right now I can't see a reason to spend a couple hundred bucks upgrading to it. Am I missing some benefit XP offers over 2000?

This stems from a friend of mine thinking I'm an idiot for using 2k, but when pressed as to why it's an issue can only come up with the argument that it's over five years old. It got me wondering... is there anything I'm missing? What would spending a couple hundred bucks upgrading my 2 boxes to XP really buy me?

 

[Fern]

I've never found any advantage to win XP myself.

I use my PC's for office apps, and one ia a pure gaming rig. H3LL, I've never been able to confirm a FPS advantage in Win XP over win98se when gaming.

I guess XP has more features. Just that they're ones I don't use......

Fern

 

[Matthias99]

Other than a few minor technical differences in the kernel, WinXP is essentially Win2K with an updated/flashier GUI and a few new features. If you turn off all the WinXP GUI effects, you're more or less running Win2K. Other than the occasional odd piece of software or hardware that won't work under Win2K, there aren't a lot of compelling reasons to switch. I'd probably use WinXP Pro for a new system just because of the slightly better HW/SW support and longer update schedule, but if I had Win2K now, I would just stick with it.

The only advantages I can think of off the top of my head are that WinXP is somewhat better at managing wireless networks (generally not important for a desktop), and you get the new firewall with WinXP SP2 (irrelevant if you have other firewall software or a hardware firewall). And the newer GUI (which I pretty much disable anyway).

 

[gobucks]

there are a few things i like better about XP - the GUI is a bit nicer looking, and i like the start menu a lot better, having set spots for internet/email, my documents, control panel, my computer, etc. Also, with SP2, you get firewall protection (not as nice as zonealarm, but still, it's a nice feature to have). And does Win2K have system restore? Cause that's saved my @$$ many times, like when I install a driver that royally screws up everything, lol.

Other than that, it's not too much different than Win2K, and I probably wouldn't spend $100-150 on an upgrade, but if you happen to get a copy, I say go for it.

 

[KoolDrew]

and i like the start menu a lot better

I agree. I hate the new theme though.

 

[MiniDoom]

remote desktop, hyperthreading support and the driver thing is why I prefer XP over 2k.

 

[Fern]

And does Win2K have system restore?

I think so (ha, I've never tried to use it on my win2k pro install ). I thought MS has offered this in their OS's since Win ME.

Fern

 

[stash]

Originally posted by: Fern

And does Win2K have system restore?

I think so (ha, I've never tried to use it on my win2k pro install ). I thought MS has offered this in their OS's since Win ME.

Fern

There's no system restore in 2000. Remember that ME was released after 2000.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Yeah. XP Pro has these features over W2K Pro:
Remote Desktop/Remote Assistance
System Restore
Volume Shadow Copy service (I think XP has this as well as 2003, correct me if I'm wrong)
Wireless Zero Config
new PnP hardware resource allocation schemes. Not quite as flexible and dynamic as Win98se is, but better than W2K. W2K's PnP support, was barely better than NT4's, best I can tell.
Better/newer ACPI support
Better/newer USB device support
Degraded network protocol-driver support (No native NetBEUI frame support)
Degraded network hardware-driver support (no NE2000 card support in XP)
Degraded game input support ("Direct" Input is no longer direct, apps need to write to a new "RawInput" API in XP, most game devs don't bother, so XP's game-controller input suffers from more software layers than W2K. As a fairly skilled gamer, I can feel the difference.)
Minor NTFS changes.
New fisher-price style desktop GUI/"themes" support (can also use 3rd-party themeing programs on W2K).

Did I forget anything?

 

[stash]

Volume Shadow Copy service (I think XP has this as well as 2003, correct me if I'm wrong)

You're wrong. You can install the VSS client on XP so that it can utilize VSS on a 2003 Server, but that is a server-only service.

Degraded network protocol-driver support (No native NetBEUI frame support)

No NetBEUI support is degraded? Welcome to 2005.

Minor NTFS changes.

The changes for EFS between 2000 and XP are not minor.

Let see what else you forgot: All the IE changes of SP2, including pop-up blocker, ActiveX restrictions, etc...RPC security changes...Windows firewall...support for autoenrollment of certificates...support for RPC/HTTPS...over 600 additional group policy settings.

There are others that I'm not remembering, but the most important thing is that XP will soon be the only client OS that will be fully supported by Microsoft. It is the only client OS that will still be evaluated for bug fixes and design changes.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: STaSh

Volume Shadow Copy service (I think XP has this as well as 2003, correct me if I'm wrong)

Actually XP does include a snapshot service, which was a precursor to the full implementation in 2003. Your thinking of the previous versions client which allows you to utilize this on 2003 server shares.

Bill

 

[stash]

Do you mean system restore?

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: STaSh
Do you mean system restore?

No, I'm talking about volume snapshot services (VSS). From MS "VSS is supported on Microsoft® Windows Server 2003 and Microsoft Windows XP. For information on which operating systems are required to use a particular interface, see the Requirements section of the documentation for the interface"

 

[Dragonbate]

" the most important thing is that XP will soon be the only client OS that will be fully supported by Microsoft. It is the only client OS that will still be evaluated for bug fixes and design changes."
That kinda hits the nail on the head- But I'll still hate the Fisher Price GUI and product activation "features" till I can safely switch all the way to a linux OS. Oh yea and don't forget "safe computing".

 

[Nothinman]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/12/xpkernel/default.aspx

 

[KoolDrew]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/12/xpkernel/default.aspx

Great link :thumbsup:

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

Originally posted by: Nothinman
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/12/xpkernel/default.aspx

Great link :thumbsup:

Agreed. Some awesome information there Nothinman!

 

[piasabird]

Pop-Up Blocker for one.

 

[rivethead]

"Other than that, it's not too much different than Win2K, and I probably wouldn't spend $100-150 on an upgrade, but if you happen to get a copy, I say go for it."

Go to Best Buy this week and get the Windows XP Home Upgrade for $89.99 plus tax and they'll give you a $60 Best Buy gift card.

I know it's not quite as powerful as XP Pro, but still might be a more affordable option.

Check out the Hot Deals forum for more info.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: STaSh

Volume Shadow Copy service (I think XP has this as well as 2003, correct me if I'm wrong)

You're wrong. You can install the VSS client on XP so that it can utilize VSS on a 2003 Server, but that is a server-only service.

mmm, almost.

Don't confuse Shadow Copy with VSS. They are not the same. Shadow Copy *USES* VSS.

VSS exists in both XP and 2003. For XP it's used by NTBackup. For 2003 it's used by NTBackup and Volume Shadow Copy.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Fern

And does Win2K have system restore?

I think so (ha, I've never tried to use it on my win2k pro install ). I thought MS has offered this in their OS's since Win ME.

Fern

Although Win ME has System Restore it's no where near the same as XPs.

Although some "experts" tend to dismiss system restore (and even disable it!), it's an incredibly powerful feature and makes XP highly recoverable. Using a restore point from the help center is just the tip of the iceberg. The data made available by system restore via the system volume information folder from recovery console can make the difference between a rebuild and 10 minutes of inconvenience.

I really hate this topic so I'll keep this simple:
If you think 2k is better than XP then you don't know nearly as much about these operating systems as you think you do. I won't attempt to convice you otherwise so I wish you much bliss in your ignorance.

 

[Emultra]

So what's the main differences between Home and Pro then?

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Emultra
So what's the main differences between Home and Pro then?

The super big #1 difference is that Pro can connect to a domain, Home can't (workgroup only). There are a few other lesser differences like encryption and whatnot but that's the biggie.

 

[Canterwood]

Originally posted by: Concillian
What would spending a couple hundred bucks upgrading my 2 boxes to XP really buy me?

It'd buy a big hole in your pocket for an OS you probably don't need.

If you have to ask what features XP has, then you're really not missing them.
Sure, there's some nice additions, but unless you need something XP has, I think you'd be wasting your money.

Longhorn is only a little over a year away, and will contain the next big set of 'new features' and security. It might be better to wait for that instead.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Fern

And does Win2K have system restore?

I think so (ha, I've never tried to use it on my win2k pro install ). I thought MS has offered this in their OS's since Win ME.

Fern

Although Win ME has System Restore it's no where near the same as XPs.

Although some "experts" tend to dismiss system restore (and even disable it!), it's an incredibly powerful feature and makes XP highly recoverable. Using a restore point from the help center is just the tip of the iceberg. The data made available by system restore via the system volume information folder from recovery console can make the difference between a rebuild and 10 minutes of inconvenience.

I really hate this topic so I'll keep this simple:
If you think 2k is better than XP then you don't know nearly as much about these operating systems as you think you do. I won't attempt to convice you otherwise so I wish you much bliss in your ignorance.

Not sure where you get that about me claiming to know a lot about OS's? :Q

I can only claim to know what I have personally experienced and researched. This is prety narrow and, as I have pointed out previously, includes only only typical biz apps (word processing and accounting programs) and gaming. As I have said elsewhere I don't use many features XP etc offer. Just gaming and simple biz apps.

After playing/benching with 98se, w2k, and XP I can't find where any has a FPR (frames per second) advantage. I have searched the net high and low and haven't found where anyone else has found a definite FPS advantage for any either. Here or there one has a extra frame or two in this games or that. Nothing consistant or large.

(Doom 3 started what I anticipate will be a trend, no workie on 98se. Thats why win2kpro is on my gaming box now )

I'm setting my rig back up with the various OS's and am getting ready to test video card/games again. After recieving my 6800GT I noticed win98se drivers are available so will test again to make sure no changes with this new generation of HW.

As for the simple biz apps we use, well suffice it say I have not noticed any meaningful (at least to me) improvements since the 486DX chip and win95/98. Again, prolly cuz I don't need or use the "new features" at this time.

But, again, I don't claim to know a lot about OS's. Just what I use/need and which works the best for me based on my testing and office experience.

Fern