Do you hate Windows XP

[Nocturnal]

Why so?

 

[acemcmac]

not at all

and don't we have a forum names "operating systems"

 

[her209]

OS X is superior to both.

 

[NTB]

XP as a whole? no, in fact I like it quite a bit. One thing I never have gotten used to though is the new XP-style start menu; I always change my computers back to the old 2k / 9x style.

Nate

 

[Phoenix86]

XPSP2>2K

XP(SP1) vs 2K was a toss up.

For the average user (read IE web surfer), SP2 rules.

 

[Schadenfroh]

win2k with all updates> bloated XP SP2

 

[40Hands]

Originally posted by: NTB
XP as a whole? no, in fact I like it quite a bit. One thing I never have gotten used to though is the new XP-style start menu; I always change my computers back to the old 2k / 9x style.

Nate

agreed. I dislike the fat blue start menu

From my experience xp is even more stable then 2k

 

[amdskip]

When it is setup correctly, it works great and trouble free.

 

[loup garou]

XP :thumbsup:

 

[KillyKillall]

nope, but it hates me.

 

[Anubis]

no i have no issues with XP SP2

 

[lokiju]

Win XP SP2 Media Center Edition 2005 > All other Windows.

 

[SSP]

Originally posted by: amdskip
When it is setup correctly, it works great and trouble free.

 

[0roo0roo]

hell no. when win2k goes down it doesn't boot at all... quite easily done to boot.

 

[tweakmm]

OS X > Win2k > Winxp

 

[DaFinn]

NO, I don't hate Xp.
NO, I don't think W2K is in anyway superior!

 

[CVSiN]

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Why so?

2000 is a POS...
give me XP pro anyday
and where is the Fvucking poll

 

[thirdlegstump]

MacOS 9 is THE BEST. XP crashes ALL THE TIME.

 

[PanzerIV]

Originally posted by: NTB
XP as a whole? no, in fact I like it quite a bit. One thing I never have gotten used to though is the new XP-style start menu; I always change my computers back to the old 2k / 9x style.

Nate

Precisely what I do. I adore XP but I turn off the little cutesy features in the performance tab also. Although I have a gig or RAM I don't want anything sucking up more memory than necessary.

 

[konakona]

Originally posted by: acemcmac
not at all

and don't we have a forum names "operating systems"

what is this bloat business you speak of? how stingy can you be about few more mb when you have 200gb harddrives? its totally worth the dramatic decrease on boot up time. other than that, they are essentially same, as you know very well. just turn off unnecessary services and XP is just every bit as fast and lightweight as win2k. i remember people have been same thing about 2k3 when it first came out... pffft they need to learn there is this little thing called services.msc :roll:

EDIT : oops, quoted a wrong person... i meant to agree with you acemcmac, pls dont take it personally

 

[Cawchy87]

never had 2k, but XP beats 98.

 

[TheAudit]

ME 4 life!

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

I have a gig or RAM I don't want anything sucking up more memory than necessary.

Unused memory will do you no good.

However, I like XP more, but I always change it to the Win classic theme and make the windows a darker shade of gray.

 

[Muadib]

Originally posted by: werk
XP :thumbsup:

 

[PanzerIV]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

I have a gig or RAM I don't want anything sucking up more memory than necessary.

Unused memory will do you no good.

However, I like XP more, but I always change it to the Win classic theme and make the windows a darker shade of gray.

Who said it was unused? Ever play any of the Battlefield games? That combined with your normal processes takes a hell of a lot of RAM. I don't sit there and admire having a gig of RAM I actually utilize it.