• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Windows 2000 still better than XP?

C

chess9

Elite member
I'm going to buy another copy of some Microsoft OS and am thinking of going to 2000. I've never used it on my box though I set it up for some folks. Anyway, since Microsoft could stop supporting it should I just buy a copy of WinXP, SP1, or go with 2000? From what I read here, 2000 is really much more stable. I don't play any games except chess online and the video demands for Blitzen are quite low. 🙂, I don't do multimedia, have about 30 mp3s I put on my Rio 800 and the rest is mostly writing, email and surfing. I'm connected to two other computers so this would be the server. I've got a DLink router....

Thanks, 'cause I'm clueless on this one at least. 🙂,

-Robert
 
Go with whichever is cheaper for you now...

MS will not stop support for Windows 2000 until sometime around the year 2005.

Windows XP (SP1 or SP1a) is just as stable as Windows 2000 (SP3 or SP4).
Keep in mind that both OSes should be patched, tweaked, and customized after install so they
form a better "match" with your system.

Keep in mind that a large number of people here also complained about Windows 2000 when
it was first released, because back then it didn't have as much multimedia and gaming support
as Windows 98SE.
 
Originally posted by: CQuinn
Go with whichever is cheaper for you now...

MS will not stop support for Windows 2000 until sometime around the year 2005.

Windows XP (SP1 or SP1a) is just as stable as Windows 2000 (SP3 or SP4).
Keep in mind that both OSes should be patched, tweaked, and customized after install so they
form a better "match" with your system.

Keep in mind that a large number of people here also complained about Windows 2000 when
it was first released, because back then it didn't have as much multimedia and gaming support
as Windows 98SE.
Click to expand...


That is a now moot arguement...From what i understand the kernel for win2k/xp is different from the old 9x ones so obviously drivers had to be rewritten but that was 3 years ago...now considering that 2k and xp are all the same save for a few things and graphical flair I can't think of one game from the 3 years that won't play on win2k

And if your arguement is valid than winxp is also flawed b/c they are based off the same kernel 😉

Again I might be wrong, but its what i've heard so if i am plz correct me
 
You misread what I posted. (and actually agreed with what I meant)

The point was that the reasons a lot of people complained about Win2k have changed as the
OS was improved over time. Now it is considered an even better gaming platform (for new
games) than 98SE ever was.

The same thing can then be said about XP... A lot of people complained about the interface,
but didn't bother to look much under the hood to see what functionality had been improved
over Win2k. Now that its been out for a while, people can take a more objective look at what
both OSes can do, and make a more informed choice as to which serves their needs.

In chess9's case, Windows 2000 sounds like it would work for him just as well as Windows XP.
 
I would get XP, simply for the extra features, but the first thing I always do when I get on an XP computer is get rid of the oogly user interface. Win Classic themes for me 🙂
 
Windows 2000 is definatly not MORE stable then XP. They are equally stable, provided that your hardware and/or drivers are well designed.

That being said, I'd say go with XP, since its just a more mature/feature rich version of 2000 Pro.
 
Thanks, guys! I think I'll do WinXP. It's a little pricier, but will be around longer, probably. No telling how long I'll be around though.... 🙂,

-Robert
 
A good question to ask though is which one is more stable out of the box? I'm thinking 2000, but maybe I'm wrong.

Oh yes, one of the few annoying things I've noticed is that XP doesn't seem to be able to see any workgroups on a network besides the one your computer is in. You can search for the computers in them manually but it never seems to work right. 2000 on the other hand doesn't have that issue. Of course, there's probably something you can do to fix that, so meh. 😛
 
You'll get better support with XP Pro, IMO. Microsoft generally seems to put out more freebies and fixes for its flagship desktop OS, which is XP right now and will continue to be XP through 2005.

And if the question is a few $, I think the extra product support lifetime from MS is worth it.

And there are the extra features in XP, too. I love the ability to Terminal Service into my machine remotely. I do that all the time from home to work since I'm not allowed to actually take source code home with me, but I like to work from home on occasion.
 
Originally posted by: yukichigai
A good question to ask though is which one is more stable out of the box? I'm thinking 2000, but maybe I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Neither. The first thing you will want to do after installing 2000 or XP is update to the latest service
pack and get all the latest security patches. You can create slipstream versions that already have
the service packs "built in", but you would still need to do additional patching afterwards.

And yes, IIRC you can fix that issue with XP seeing other workgroups on the network.

 
The short answer would be to browse thru "Entire Network" under My Network places.

I'll have to try and research a longer answer.
 
Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy
I would get XP, simply for the extra features, but the first thing I always do when I get on an XP computer is get rid of the oogly user interface. Win Classic themes for me 🙂
Click to expand...

OR you skin it so it's much better than original bulky theme...

😀

Mine
 
I find that 2000 tends to run a bit better on older machines than XP. On most newer machine I prefer XP because of better plug and play hardware support, built in zip file handling, and a lot of other small features that are nice to have.

 
Originally posted by: BG4533
I find that 2000 tends to run a bit better on older machines than XP. On most newer machine I prefer XP because of better plug and play hardware support, built in zip file handling, and a lot of other small features that are nice to have.
Click to expand...

Agreed... Anything under 256 isn't or shouldn't be accpetable for XP...

 
Skinability and the builtin picture viewer are the 2 main reasons I lean towards XP.

Average users tend to favor XP because it's sexier. 😀
 
I have heard this repeated on this thread before, but I'll say it again. 2k is not more stable than XP. They are essentially the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top