Win2k vs. WinXP

[jrichrds]

I tried searching for a topic like this as I'm sure it's been covered a few times, but came up empty-handed.

I'm using Win2k now. I use office and Internet apps. Everything seems to run well. I don't play games. Is there any benefit in upgrading to WinXP? (Will it run my office and internet apps faster? Will it manage the 4448MB of RAM I have better?)

 

[Moonbender]

Is there any benefit in upgrading to WinXP? (Will it run my office and internet apps faster? Will it manage the 4448MB of RAM I have better?)

No.

Oh, and for a moment I was thinking you had, in fact, over 4 GBs of RAM (and for Office and Internet apps, to boot), but then I added up 256 + 128 + 64 = 448.

 

[Fatt]

win2000 = NT 5.0

XP = NT 5.1

If it aint broke, don't fix it.

 

[jrichrds]

Oh, and for a moment I was thinking you had, in fact, over 4 GBs of RAM (and for Office and Internet apps, to boot), but then I added up 256 + 128 + 64 = 448.

Haha, oops! You have it right.

Good to know I'm not missing out on anything performance-wise!

 

[BCYL]

I actually switched back from XP to 2k since I didnt like XP... It hogs quite a bit more resources with the pretty interface and stuff...

XP does do a lot more stuff automatically though... and has all these built-in apps like support for zip, CD burner etc...

 

[jrichrds]

Sounds like w2k would actually be the preferred choice for a lot of us still.

I remember upgrading from Win98SE to Win2k was worth it for the memory management alone. Having more than 256MB RAM in Win98 seemed pointless, as I would run out of system resources before I got even close to running out of RAM.

 

[datalink7]

I prefere XP myself.

 

[jrichrds]

Originally posted by: datalink7
I prefere XP myself.

Some reasons would be helpful.

 

[Mem]

I prefer XP,has more features better for gaming also you can disable some of the builit-in stuff so no big deal,and if you`ve enough ram then shouldn`t be a problem,I`m using 512mb and its excellent with that amount.

Also remember WinXP SP1 is out which adds USB 2.0 support and stability with SP1 is rock solid for me .

 

[Nothinman]

Why spend the money upgrading to such a minor revision?

XP has more annoyances than features over Win2K IMHO.

 

[CTho9305]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Why spend the money upgrading to such a minor revision?

XP has more annoyances than features over Win2K IMHO.

I would run whichever costs less money. In my case, XP is $10 under our MSCA (campus agreement - for all the students here ) so I tried it and like it.

 

[Nothinman]

I would run whichever costs less money

He said he's already running Win2K, can't get much cheaper than already owning it.

XP is $10 under our MSCA (campus agreement - for all the students here ) so I tried it and like it.

I wouldn't even pay $10 for it, given a choice I'd rather pay a little more for Win2K or nothing for Linux.

Take advantage of the edu discounts while you can, I know I didn't :/

 

[CTho9305]

>>I wouldn't even pay $10 for it, given a choice I'd rather pay a little more for Win2K or nothing for Linux.

it's better than all of win9x, so you would never have paid for 9x? its more functional for what I do than any linux distro... and, well, if you turn off the new animations/fades, it is just a win2k with a faster task-switch

 

[Nothinman]

it's better than all of win9x, so you would never have paid for 9x?

Not now I wouldn't.

its more functional for what I do than any linux distro... and, well, if you turn off the new animations/fades, it is just a win2k with a faster task-switch

The only thing I keep windows around for is games, so Linux works just fine for me. And I did have XP on my notebook and even with all the PlaySkool stuff turned off it annoyed the hell out of me.

 

[CtlAltl33t]

Even though the topic starter does not play games, for what its worth, I noticed a considerable jump in gaming performance converting from 2k to XP.

Let's face it, XP is the new/improved commodity. It's got the most and latest support, and until Microsoft decides to release something else that is the way it is going to stay. Since Winxp is also newer than 2k, it has a larger, more versatile driver base (more up to date) so installing certain hardware is less of a pain.

All in all, most of the differences are subtle if noticable at all, and I think your hardware plays a large role in it as well. If you have access to both, do what I did. Install both of em and test em, and then decide which one you want to use based on which one you like more.

 

[Indus]

I use and like both. I like XP better personally but is there any real reason to upgrade to XP from 2000? no.

If you're however running windows 98/ ME, yes upgrade and upgrade now.

The only real advantage to XP is its built in driver support is AMAZING. You don't have to do, install driver, reboot, install driver, reboot, etc. Also its a tad bit faster than 2000. (not really noticeable). And also its more tailored for the home user than a networking environment. Also its system restore helps quite a bit if you're new using computers.

But if you're comfy with 2k, stick with it. 2k and XP are basically like 98 and 98SE. Not much difference except in driver support.

 

[randypj]

Games and all seem to work fine for me in W2K with 1 gig RAM. Finer enough than W98SE to not muck with it.

If I do ever decide to go to XP, can I upgrade without a fresh install? I'm thinking W2K to XP isn't an official M$ft upgrade path?
--Randy

 

[Nothinman]

Sure 2K -> XP is an official upgrade path, it's probably the easiest too since there's so little difference between the two.

 

[butch84]

I think its worth having winxp so as to have "official" support for the newest games and drivers. Even though most winxp drivers work in win2k, i enjoy some of the added functionality of winxp as well. As far as the interface and built in services, they are all completely customizable. I run everything to look like win2k, including networking and gui positioning. As far as services you dont need (such as built in cd burning and the like), those can all be enabled/disabled by going into the control panel/administrative tools/services. In short, xp is 2k that gives you the *option* of increased simplification if you want it, and support for the newest features in the market.

But thats just my opinion. I really like win2k too, but i have a legal copy of XP and not 2k, so that kinda made the decision for me

Butch

 

[Nothinman]

I really like win2k too, but i have a legal copy of XP and not 2k, so that kinda made the decision for me

The licenses are backwards compatible, meaning if you have an XP license you can legally run Win2K or NT4 (probably even any version of NT earlier than XP), we've been doing this where I work because the boxes we get come with Win2K licenses and we put NT 4 on them and recently they come with XP licenses but we put Win2K on them.

 

[ynotravid]

Two reasons why I hate XP:

1.) Product Activation
2.) Spyware

BTW, I am posting this on my XP box so take it for what it's worth.

 

[kendogg]

Originally posted by: ynotravid
Two reasons why I hate XP:

1.) Product Activation
2.) Spyware

BTW, I am posting this on my XP box so take it for what it's worth.

hmm. winxp has spyware? how where when?

 

[ynotravid]

Originally posted by: kendogg

Originally posted by: ynotravid
Two reasons why I hate XP:

1.) Product Activation
2.) Spyware

BTW, I am posting this on my XP box so take it for what it's worth.

hmm. winxp has spyware? how where when?

for instance when you do a search xp will, if connected to the internet, send a small encripted packet to an unidentified destination. This part can be verified by anyone by using "netstat -an" before and after doing a file search.

This part is not as easily verified. I have been told by a fairly reliable source that at Defcon they were able to decrypt the messeges and they turned out to be text files that listed the search results. I am also told the destination ip resolved to a government web address. This would make sense if the government wanted to crack down on kiddy porn or something of that nature.

Again the second part is not as important to me because I don't care what info it's sending is, or to who it's sending it. If I didn't ask it to send then I'm a little unerved.

 

[Moonbender]

You're kidding, right? Got any kind of source on that?

 

[ynotravid]

Do me a favor and try it.

the reverse dns might come up with a windows domain but the rest is ligit.