Bill42690
Veteran Member
This is a 4 year-old article announcing WniXP... Doesn't support your statements
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Should I consider XP Pro vs. XP home for home comp?
- Thread starter Jeff Erler
- Start date
Bill42690
Veteran Member
Yes, Pro does come with a back-up utility (as a matter of fact, that is one of the main reasons I bought Pro). However, it really is not a very good application (much better than what's available - once you tunnel thru the install CD). Third party utilities are much better. For example, your choice of back-up devices is very limited. Last time I checked, you couldn't back-up to a CD or DVD drive.
Bill42690
Veteran Member
You have missed my point. The OP stated that Home was dead; Pro was not. IMO, a very outlandish statement, since it's the same O/S. And I never discussed which O/S is/is not cr*p - you brought that up. In fact, the whole Win9x line was considered by many to be cr*p. And yes, the NT line will also be dead once Longhorn arrives on the scene - whenever that will be (the projected date seems to keep sliding). Until then, though, XP - Pro AND Home are very much alive.
The level of hardware technology ("high end") should not influence which O/S a consumer should buy - with the exception of dual processors, the O/S really doesn't matter; either Pro or Home will support the hardware. The choice should really be based on the needs of the user: Domain support, file encryption, group policy, etc. And there are many people that need these features (I bought Pro for domain support) - if there's a need, great! Go for it... But the AVERAGE user, not part of a corporate network, doesn't need the additional features of Pro - regardless of whether or not he/she owns a "high end" system. So, if a user wants to spend $100 more to buy Pro, more power to him - as long as he needs it, and not because it is "better." I have better uses for my money than wasting it on something that some self-anointed "expert" says is better (and really can't explain why).
The level of hardware technology ("high end") should not influence which O/S a consumer should buy - with the exception of dual processors, the O/S really doesn't matter; either Pro or Home will support the hardware. The choice should really be based on the needs of the user: Domain support, file encryption, group policy, etc. And there are many people that need these features (I bought Pro for domain support) - if there's a need, great! Go for it... But the AVERAGE user, not part of a corporate network, doesn't need the additional features of Pro - regardless of whether or not he/she owns a "high end" system. So, if a user wants to spend $100 more to buy Pro, more power to him - as long as he needs it, and not because it is "better." I have better uses for my money than wasting it on something that some self-anointed "expert" says is better (and really can't explain why).
Mike Fulton
Veteran Member
I believe "chomper" does not understand that Windows XP Pro & Home are part of the "NT Line", as is Windows 2000. He thought you were talking specifically about Windows NT 4.0 (or some earlier version) being a current OS.
Mike
Roger Hall
Active member
Bill,
Here is another one for you to discount.
http://206.128.27.142/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic ;f=1;t=006096
Bill42690
Veteran Member
DUDE! Are you serious??? You make a claim based on what someone wrote in a forum? Why on earth would you even think someone making such an unfounded statement know what he was talking about?
Elvis Presley is alive! I saw it on the internet!!!
Elvis Presley is alive! I saw it on the internet!!!
Roger Hall
Active member
You are the greatest.. You make me glad I don't respond often to these forums. Closed mindness can be catchy.
Bill42690
Veteran Member
Ah, Roger... At first I was going to blow this off for the very reason you cited. But let's take a last look at this. In your original post you stated"XP Pro is the only SP version that will be upgraded in the future. XP Home is a dead end product. All professionals that I know suggest XP Pro. I personally wouldn't install XP Home." (And just what did you mean by "SP version?" I read that as a typo for XP) I called you on your statement that "Home" wll no longer be "upgraded," (what exactly does that mean? To me it means supported with Service Packs, etc.) I further asked you to clarify your statement about why you wouldn't install "Home" by giving your personal, exact reasons for this statement.
Instead, you reply with a link to a webpage and tell me to read the first paragraph. I clicked on the link give with great anticipation, and what do I find? A 4 year old review of a beta version of XP that nowhere states that "Home" is dead (And how could it? The O/S hadn't even yet been "born!") (I might interject here that there have been two service packs released since then to the production version of Home as well as Pro)
I call you on that, and you then point me to a forum where some "Joe on the internet" claims Home is dead. Why should I believe this? Who is this guy? What are his credentials? Where is his authority? Where is his PROOF?!
So, let's take another look at this from an historical perspective. In the beginning was Windows 3.0 which became 3.1 (Yes, there was a 1.0 and 2.0 also, but they didn't really amount to much in terms of commercial success) 3.0 was a DOS shell, which went on to become Win95, Win98, and winMe, which is where the line expired (But WinMe is still supported). All were DOS shells. Parallel to this MS developed the NT system. Although it LOOKED and ACTED like Win9x, it in fact was a completely different O/S - it did not use DOS at all. MS targeted this version at the corporate market, much as they do with WinXP Pro today. This system acheived great success with version 4.0. MS replaced 4.0 with 5.0, but before release it was renamed "Windows 2000 Professional.' At the time MS was also going to incorporate a version similar to "Home," but for various reasons didn't - that's when the Win9x version known as WinMe arrived on the scene. WindowsXP was released as a replacement for both Win2K and WinMe. The fact is that both versions of XP are the same exact operating system - with additional functionality appealing to the corporate market included in the Pro version. I'm sure too that MS sells a lot more versions of Home than Pro (but I can't prove it right now)
On the horizon is a new O/S under development code named "Longhorn." When this will actually hit the market is unknown - the original projections I saw were for sometime in 2004; I saw just the other day a projected date of mid 2006. So, who knows when it will actually happen? But when it does, I think it would be safe to say that the NT line will expire, taking with it BOTH XP Pro and XP Home. Until that happens, Home will be just as alive as Pro.
Roger Hall
Active member
Bill,
We seem to be looking at two different views. When I stated dead end for XP Home, I'm talking about an upgrade to Longhorn or whatever the next MS product will be.
Just like my Win 2000 Pro, I had to purchase a full version of XP, I couldn't purchase an upgrade version of XP.
I fully realize that SP's will be available for XP Home, but I don't believe there will be enhancements to the Home version.
Oops, I responded when I decided enough is enough.
Mike Fulton
Veteran Member
Did you actually read the message thread you're linking to? I can't imagine that you did, because it's talking about upgrading an existing installation of Windows XP Home to the Pro edition.
It had nothing whatsoever to do with discussing the Home edition as it relates to future releases from Microsoft.
MIke
Joe Wilson
Veteran Member
where did you get your information that there won't be an upgrade to Longhorn? Also, I'm not sure why you didn't get an upgrade version. YOu can see this chart here http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/upgrading/matrix.mspx
http://public.fotki.com/joesimages/
--
http://public.fotki.com/joesimages/
Dan Tong
Leading Member
I echo everything Talmy said. He/she appears to have answered the question far more thougthfully than most other people.
In summary for the higher price XP Pro is far better if you have any concerns about security, and customizability. Every other week, I find out one more function that is missing from XP home.
Dan
In summary for the higher price XP Pro is far better if you have any concerns about security, and customizability. Every other week, I find out one more function that is missing from XP home.
Dan
Bill Gilbertson
Leading Member
It's a superset of Pro and it's cheaper.
--
BillG
--
BillG
Mike Fulton
Veteran Member
Media Center Edition is not available as a retail package. It's included only with prebuilt "Media Center" computers
Mike
Rancher5
Veteran Member
--
Good Luck, Enjoy
talmy
Veteran Member
Are you sure it's a superset of pro? To quote the Microsoft site:
"Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 is the first consumer OS built on top of the Windows XP Home and Service Pack 2 (SP2) foundation with Advanced Security Technologies including Windows Firewall, Pop-up Blocker for Internet Explorer, and the new Windows Security Center, all while offering all of the features available today in Windows XP Home Edition."
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/mediacenter/evaluation/features.mspx
I can't find anything mentioning any feature of Pro over Home in the description of MCE.
Bill Gilbertson
Leading Member
That's interesting. I did my research before the advent of Media Center 2005 and I am prettty sure that's what MS claimed back . Now I can't find any reference.
I do know this - I have a dual processor system with Media Center 2005 and it recognises 2 hyperthreaded processors. I can install IIS from Add Programs.
Here are some snippets from the FAC http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/mediacenter/evaluation/faq.mspx
that lead me to believe it is no longer a superset, but that MCE 2004 was.
Q. Can I connect a new PC running Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 to a work network or domain?
A. While you can access network resources on a work network or a domain, you cannot join a Windows XP Media Center 2005 PC to the domain. PCs running Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 are designed specifically for home use. Professional features, specifically Domain Join and Cached Credentials (Credentials Manager for logins) are not included. As a result, you will be prompted for your login username/password to access network resources after a reboot or logging back into the PC. In addition, file shares or network resources set to require a domain-joined PC for access will not be available. Remote Desktop and Encrypting File System support are still included.
Q. What about consumers upgrading from Windows XP Media Center Edition 2004? Will they lose these features?
A. No. Consumers who are eligible for an upgrade to Media Center Edition 2005 will keep these features as they were a part of their originally purchased product.
Q. What is a Media Center PC, and what kind of hardware components does it include?
A. Media Center PCs are complete desktop PCs equipped with hardware and software to deliver advanced computing and rich digital entertainment experiences. Media Center PCs include mid- to high-end processors, high-capacity hard drives, CD-ROM and DVD drives, and optionally, a remote control. The systems feature advanced graphics and audio capabilities, as well as networking connectivity.
Thanks Talmy for challenging my assertion.
--
BillG
lukaszj
Active member
Here's MS's head to head comparison:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/choosing2.mspx
L.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum