-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Win XP pro or Win 2000 pro ?
- Thread starter JoseMaza
- Start date
Loggedonnow
Senior Member
It depends what you want to do with the machine.
J
Jim T
Guest
My new PC had both Win2k and WinXP on it for three months. I alternated between the two throughout that period and based on the applications I use and the more importantly the accessories I use I found Windows XP Pro to be more useful and supported more of my equipment. The reason I had Win2k on the system was because my brother-in-law is an IT person and recommended it. I think it's because that's what he has on the systems at work where he looks after a couple hundred systems on a network.
Funny thing is, I've been using WinXP Pro for a year now and stopped having debates with my brother-in-law about Win2k. Over Christmas I noticed at his home he is using WinXP on his three systems as well and installed it on a new system for my niece that went off to university.
http://www.jamesthompsonconsultingengineer.com
Funny thing is, I've been using WinXP Pro for a year now and stopped having debates with my brother-in-law about Win2k. Over Christmas I noticed at his home he is using WinXP on his three systems as well and installed it on a new system for my niece that went off to university.
--
http://www.jamesthompsonconsultingengineer.com
Raw disk subsystem speed = Win2K
Overall responsiveness = Win2K
Convenience for a digital shooter = WinXP + WinXP Power Toys
Eye candy = WinXP
Hyper Threading support = WinXP Pro, Win2K Server/Advanced Server
Clean, lean LAN/file/print sharing = Win2K
Even after gutting XP out for max performance vs. eye candy, the "seat of the pants" feel vs. Win2K on an IDE RAID/SCSI/SCSI RAID rig = autocross tuned suspension vs. touring car suspension...
N
Nicholas Poore
Guest
Facecious answer:
The sales guy was going to give you a stolen copy of Windows2000, but he can't figure out how to hack XP.
Serious answer.
Go for the XP. It is more user friendly, and better with photos.
Both are reliable, both work with pretty much anything.
I have only found ONE program that doesn't work on XP that does work on 2000 (Symantec Procomm Plus).
Good luck.
-=Nick=-
The sales guy was going to give you a stolen copy of Windows2000, but he can't figure out how to hack XP.
Serious answer.
Go for the XP. It is more user friendly, and better with photos.
Both are reliable, both work with pretty much anything.
I have only found ONE program that doesn't work on XP that does work on 2000 (Symantec Procomm Plus).
Good luck.
-=Nick=-
Bill42690
Senior Member
I'm just wondering why you think you need XP Pro and not Home... For most users, Pro has no real advantage, unless you need support for dual processors, domain support in networks, file encryptation, etc. Other than these added bells and whistles, Pro and Home are identical.
Look at: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/whichxp.asp
Look at: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/whichxp.asp
Bruce Gladstone
Well-known member
One advantage of Win XP Pro is remote desktop (XP home will not host remote desktop). If you have a high speed (dsl or cable) connection Remote desktop is great. I have win2k at work, XP home on one laptop, 2K on my wife's PC and I can run my home machine from any of these locations anytime I like. I find I have much less need to keep multiple data files in sync. However, don't recommend trying to edit photos remotely. But email, Quicken, Word, Excel work great for me.
They are basically the same operating system, XP has more features and newer functionality in some minor areas. I use 2000 pro, and i love it. I have also heard that after 1 more year that Micro$oft will officially stop supporting 2000. That doesn't mean all 2000 pro users will be stranded and have to upgrade, it just means that it is getting old compared to XP. If I was buying a new computer today, i would get XP pro because it has been around long enough that it is supported throughout and it will have future supportability for a few more years to come. My local computer shop guru's have all started to recommend XP for these reasons.
I have used XP and I will say that it is just a matter of getting used to it and getting rid of all the "googly and bubbly" graphics. In the display properties you can set your desktop to "classic windows" and it becomes very similar looking to 2000 pro.
2000 Pro is great, and I have had no real problems with it ( I think my computer has crashed once in 1.5 years).
XP home uses fat 32 file system. XP Pro uses NTFS file system (newer)
Thanks, I now know not to trust EVERYTHING the guy at my computer shop says. At first I didn't believe him when he said FAT32 only for XP home, but then he showed me a comparision sheet between XP home and pro. Obviously the comparison sheet was a piece of propaganda meant to confuse potential home version buyers. Who can you trust these days?
Certainly, remote desktop is built into XP Pro, but if you want a remote desktop capability there are after-market products you can buy (PC Anywhere, for example) that offer more features than remote desktop. Or, you can use VNC or RealVNC that are free, and give you complete control (screen, kybd, mouse) over another PC. I use VNC and RealVNC, and like them (primarily for accessing my home PC from work). Win2K Server also support Terminal Server, which is the same thing (Win2K Pro does not).
But, the question is: WinXP Pro or Win2K Pro. Well...
I've used both, although I have much more experience with Win2K. I'm used to Win2K, I like Win2K, I "trust" Win2K, and I've only left XP on a laptop I have sitting around. Win2K's solid, proven, "burnt in," and predictable. WinXP was somewhat problematic for me, but over time most of the quirks were ironed out, and XP's going to be around after 2K's obsolete. I detest XP's activation, primarily because I went through heck with it as a beta tester (many early bugs), and because I tend to swap out a lot of parts in my systems, and XP gets fussy about that.
That all said, I'd recommend ... XP, even though I'm sticking with 2K myself. The reason I'd recommend it is because it's newer, and will have a longer support life than 2K, and because MS will be putting its efforts toward improving XP whereas 2K is on its heels (targeted obsolescence, of course). Win2K will be around for a long time, don't get me wrong, but you'll get better HW & SW support in the future with XP. And, call me "fluffy," but I like the look of XP over 2K now (I didn't at first, and the pre-releases were sometimes bizzare). I'd also strongly recommend staying away from XP Home, it has limitations from the Pro version (the aforementioned remote desktop is one, and networking is handicapped in Home, although most of the limitations pertain more to business networks than ... home).
That's my take. I imagine in a year or so I'll be converted over to XP across the board myself.
Brats
But, the question is: WinXP Pro or Win2K Pro. Well...
I've used both, although I have much more experience with Win2K. I'm used to Win2K, I like Win2K, I "trust" Win2K, and I've only left XP on a laptop I have sitting around. Win2K's solid, proven, "burnt in," and predictable. WinXP was somewhat problematic for me, but over time most of the quirks were ironed out, and XP's going to be around after 2K's obsolete. I detest XP's activation, primarily because I went through heck with it as a beta tester (many early bugs), and because I tend to swap out a lot of parts in my systems, and XP gets fussy about that.
That all said, I'd recommend ... XP, even though I'm sticking with 2K myself. The reason I'd recommend it is because it's newer, and will have a longer support life than 2K, and because MS will be putting its efforts toward improving XP whereas 2K is on its heels (targeted obsolescence, of course). Win2K will be around for a long time, don't get me wrong, but you'll get better HW & SW support in the future with XP. And, call me "fluffy," but I like the look of XP over 2K now (I didn't at first, and the pre-releases were sometimes bizzare). I'd also strongly recommend staying away from XP Home, it has limitations from the Pro version (the aforementioned remote desktop is one, and networking is handicapped in Home, although most of the limitations pertain more to business networks than ... home).
That's my take. I imagine in a year or so I'll be converted over to XP across the board myself.
Brats
Marty Scher B
Senior Member
I agree with you that although W2k is not dead, it certainly has to be dying, when the MS developement bucks are being dished out.
XP is the MS flagship desktop product.
XP is stable as W2k, has better PNP support, and is getting service packs and regular secruity updates.
No reason not to go with XP, IMO.
Regards
XP is the MS flagship desktop product.
XP is stable as W2k, has better PNP support, and is getting service packs and regular secruity updates.
No reason not to go with XP, IMO.
Regards
Generally MS Product support = 5 years
Keep in mind many busineses haven't even migrated from NT4 to Win2K, much less WinXP. For those businesses that HAVE migrated to Win2K, they sure as hell won't be eager to jump into XP/.NET. (Volume licensing, labor costs, HW upgrades, etc.)
Win2K product support will be around for a few years & you can bet MS won't "neglect" it...
Debateable...
Unless you want/need/have:
SW (Dynamic Disk) RAID5 and/or mirrored volumes:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/reskit/prkb_cnc_vavr.asp
More than 10 inbound LAN connections:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb ;en-us;314882
SCSI/SCSI RAID performance (including IDE RAID)
.NET RC2 addresses some of the performance hit, WinXPSP1 did NOT, as is widely believed:
http://forums.storagereview.net/viewtopic.php?t=5833
For the lucky few that have found workarounds and/or those that the various tweaks work for, great. For the majority that are still suffering...
HW that has immature XP drivers or drivers that lose some functions.
(Limited or no OGL support on many graphics cards, loss of duplex printing, etc.)
SW that won't run properly, even in compatibiity mode.
(Too many to list...)
Etc. Etc. Etc...
Again, for many of the 'typical" home desktop usesr, XP may be fine. For many "power users" or those that want/need some of the things outlined above, there can be a multitude of reasons NOT "...to go with XP..."
JKP
Well-known member
What I have understood, the home edition doesn't support networking with older windows system like win98, which I for example have on my laptop (memory limitations). So file sharing between desktop and laptop would not work.
-jkp-
-jkp-
Marty Scher B
Senior Member
One can wonder how long support was available for MSDOS 4.0 ;
Ok, I'll debate.Keep in mind many busineses haven't even migrated from NT4 to
Win2K, much less WinXP. For those businesses that HAVE migrated to
Win2K, they sure as hell won't be eager to jump into XP/.NET.
(Volume licensing, labor costs, HW upgrades, etc.)
Win2K product support will be around for a few years & you can bet
MS won't "neglect" it...
Debateable...
Here is q quote from the MS site, which incendentaly had XP come up first
in the Windows page.
"Microsoft’s most advanced desktop operating system, Windows XP, is at the center of ongoing personal computing innovation. With Windows XP, home users can experience the digital world like never before, while business users can work smarter and faster. "
Anyone with a real need for RAID or mirroring should do it at the hardware level, espeially since hardware prices have come way down. There is too much overhead to do it at the OS level.
Some things never change ;
"The maximum number of other computers that are permitted to simultaneously connect over the network to Windows NT Workstation 3.5, 3.51, 4.0, and Windows 2000 Professional is ten."
We had an earleir project to upgrade 6,000 PC to XP from NT 4.0, but went to W2k only for divisional standards reasons. We could find no technical reasons to go to W2k and not XP.
Have a great day!
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum Pro
Hello to ALL,
Below is a link to information regarding XP Pro vs XP Home. I know the subject is regarding the merits of XP Pro vs Win 2000. This information was published several months ago, however; it possibly may be helpful for someone.
One comment regarding using XP (Pro or Home) is that it definitely is necessary to be certain to get (download) the latest drivers for the equipment and devices to be supported. I believe this is the primary problem that is the cause should there be trouble with XP. As far as I am concerned, since I use XP Pro; is that this is the first MS Operating System that has given little to NO problems for me.
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/windowsxp_home_pro.asp
--
Vernon...
http://www.pbase.com/vrain
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum