Q: Assuming it is not intended to support a new Hyperthreading P4, you know you can not upgrade or recommend, and why?
Please only vote if you upgrade from Win2K to WinXP, or you have experience with both.
Re:If you already have win2k, just don't go and buy winXP!! It's not worth the price.
If you have neither, I think winXP is the way to go ![]()
Re:About 20% of the voters say XP outperforms 2K… So please tell me, besides a somewhat faster bootup, where/how else does XP outperform 2K? :confused:
Re:better driver support…yes, they both use WDM, but i SWEAR that often win2k and winxp driver sets are not the same for a given piece of hardware.
Re:I have been using Win2k for quite some time now and I am very happy with it. Very stable and solid.
The one time I did go to Winxp and i had a lot of problems. The hard disk would seek even when there is no application or process running and within a few weeks it crashed completely. I went back to Win2k and have never bothered to upgrade.
Re:I like both because it is stable and stable than win98/winME. I'm using WinXP now just because;
1. boot time is a bit better than win2k
2. I like eyecandy
3. it got system restore. (sometimes i hate this function because it use more resource)
The only thing that I hate about winXP is the product activatation.
tweaked winXP = win2k with the nice eyecandy ![]()
Re:"I went to Windows XP Professional today because Service Pack 3 killed my Win2k install. It's noticeably faster, but I will have to readjust to a number of little things. All-around a good step up though, but only justifiable if you're in the position of being required to install an OS"
Hmmmmmmmm. I'm just about to install Service Pack 3, better Ghost first.
guy, just what went wrong???????????????
Re:Maybe its just me, but I just dont get the big hype over Win XP. I am running Win2k Pro and I just dont see a need to upgrade. It serves everything I need and I haven't had a single problem with it yet. I love it!:D:|:D
Re:Stay with 2k, XP is nice but sometimes it just has too much eyecandy IMHO!
Re:I went to Windows XP Professional today because Service Pack 3 killed my Win2k install. It's noticeably faster, but I will have to readjust to a number of little things. All-around a good step up though, but only justifiable if you're in the position of being required to install an OS.
Re:Hell the boot up time alone is worth it.
Hehe well not really but I want WinXP fromm Win2K and haven't looked back.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
I say, if you are happy with what you got right now, then keep it like that.
Simplistic, but nevertheless it's the best advice!
Re:I say, if you are happy with what you got right now, then keep it like that.
Re:I don't like my O/S to have to phone home to keep running! Even if it's by mistake, having Microsoft at the controls of my machine makes me a bit nervous.
Re:(no need for hyperthreading support)
I know it was excluded, but HT rocks, I like my two extra virtual cpu's
Having used both, I can tell you that although M$ hyped WinXP as having a much improved kernel, supposedly resulting in improved bootup time, improved I/O, etc., I just haven't seen any of that.
Your mileage will vary, I certainly have. Although I think 2k might be better for some older (p200 etc) hardware. Anything 'newer' (450+), I'm putting XP on.
you would still have to buy 2 copies of XP, whereas you would only need one copy of Win2K.
You needed to buy 2 copies of 2k also.
Bill
Re:I voted to stay with Win2K because IMHO you eliminated the most valid reason for upgrading (no need for hyperthreading support). Having used both, I can tell you that although M$ hyped WinXP as having a much improved kernel, supposedly resulting in improved bootup time, improved I/O, etc., I just haven't seen any of that.
Furthermore, you have to buy a copy of XP for each PC you put it on (legally speaking). So for example, if you have a desktop and a notebook but you only use one of them at any given time, you would still have to buy 2 copies of XP, whereas you would only need one copy of Win2K.
0 Comments.