XP Pro vs. Win2k???

[Whyzman]

It's been a while since the release of Windows XP and folks have had a chance to tweak :cool: ,and play :p , and perhaps even get frustrated! :mad:

My question and poll are directed especially to those of you who have multiple OS experience, more specifically, to those able to compare the benefits ;) , and or "side effects" evident in Windows 2000 and XP Pro. If you vote, please do so not based on what you may have heard, but rather your own experience with the operating system/s.

I'm at that crossroads as I build a new system where I need to seriously contemplate which operating system to use. The system will be used primarily for gaming and homework for my kids.

I'd like something stable... :rolleyes: Wouldn't we all....:( :D

[Jiggy]

id vote for both OS`s, w2k has the feel of old, i meen the win98 feel, look but with non of the hassle of win98, w2k gave a better connection on a external 56k modem and a better platform for games and online gaming and more folders files to mess up.
then theres winXP a bright colorful adult friendly os that doesnt bite your head off when you start playing around, ok things may have been moved around and put were you cant find them, but its a new os, thats expected, like w2k its plays all the latest games no probs, just feed it memory and your os will last at least a few years. a friend says they have taken control away from the user, its because he cant find what hes after.:D

[Steve]

Whyzman,

I've used them all. Any one of them will get the job done. At this time I'm sold on ALL of them.

I have XP Pro on my main machine. It really does suit my family very well. Cruise the internet, download music, do homework, work with the family photos, record keeping, networking, etc..

I was very resistant to XP. I really don't like NEW. I was content with 98se and w2k. Why did I need this new M$ offering. Especially with this activation baloney! "I know my rights!" "I can do anything I want with a product I've paid for." Well, I got over it. :)

I have XP Pro on my main computer, XP Home on my laptop, W2k on my "overclocked experiment" and Win98se on a nice little Acer that I wish I could find a job for.

It was Sea69 who convinced me. He said something like "welcome to the future". Product activation is here to stay. So is XP. XP does everything that the other OS's will do and does most of them better.

:)

[malcore]

Whyzman,
Although both are good and by far better than 9x and ME, I would have to say for gaming go XP. 2000 was not intended for the every day home user and there are some compatibility issues with games (although minor). There have been issues with XP, but fixes and workarounds are more readily available.

For gaming, go XP.

[jabarnutcase]

Been using XP Pro quite a while now....Like most things, we try to resist change.
We get comfortable with an OS and hate to have to "Re-Learn" something that's sort of the same (but a whole lot different at the same time!)

Now that I've become used to XP and familiar with it's features and stability, I feel it's the best M$ OS by far....(So far)
:eek:

It will keep you busy for a while...I'm still finding features I didn't know were there.
What the heck ol' buddy...You're gonna try it sooner or later- Why not sooner? :D

As far as stability, I'm still looking for that. (In me, not the OS) :rolleyes:

[YODA74]

xp

[Budfred]

I am not qualified to vote yet. I have been spending most of the day working to set up my sister's Xmas computer which has XP and it allows me in now that I activated the damn thing. I have been pleasantly surprised that it is running some really old games that she wants installed. I just installed a set of Win3.1/Win95 games that had a couple of error messages, but seem to be running. I have a bunch more to install, so I will see how that goes. If it works consistently, I will remove the Win98 I installed on another partition to allow more legacy programs.

That said, I haven't really played with my Win2K install on my P4 build yet because I have been busy getting the XP build set up to ship out. I will vote after I have had more time to play and compare, but the point may be moot by then. Oh well.....:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Budfred

[Rick]

Sorry I can’t give you any specific details here,
But I have found Most of the games I tested with XP work
Except for one thing .

The Video intro on some.
Regardless of what patch or update is installed ( I Know about the patch at MS– It didn’t help)
Aside from that Most games ran on XP..
A few required setting the Compatibility option to get them running smoothly.
Crash Free ? Not all of them. Quake can still crash winXP pro..and I do mean crash. In the form of a total system lockup .. Not many programs can do that

As to installing games on Win2K .. Sorry
Every 2K system I have set was intended for office Use.. ( The Frown On Games in the Office)
So I haven’t seen what the included games looked or ran like. ( Removed all of them)

[Jhorner1]

My computer has 98se and 2000, and I just added XP home to my wife's 98 setup. 2000 has some issues with games, but is very stable and familiar looking, XP has been a godsend for my wife's system, been running it for about 3 days, and no problems, (this system used to lock up 3-5 times an evening, result of being old and corrupted, but she wouldn't let me reinstall 98, afraid of losing data).Yes the interface is different, (cute, not necessarily better)But most programs and utilities can be found the same place they were in 2000. Also drivers installed much easier, did not have to provide any driver disks. Would recommend XP to anyone, only using 2000 for myself because A+ tests on 2000, and not XP.

[classicsoftware]

If you are gaming, go with XP. If you are using it in a business application, I like Win2K.

I really hate the interface on XP, it seems cartoonish to me. I also despise the networking. It seems built to the lowest common denominator. That means do it ths MS way or spend a lot of time trying to figure out how to do it your way.

Both are rock solid and well built Os's.....

I have no data to back it up, but I think XP is more of a memory hog than Win2K all other things being equall