<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Would you rather use Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, or Windows XP? ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-19T14:07:29-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[stop feeding into windows]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-494359]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[As techs we need to stop letting windows dictate the market force them to put out a good product without bugs and security holes then buy it. they can do that, because all they have to do is take their time, and stop tryiing to just put out a product.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-494359]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[igotskillz1@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 16 Feb 2002 07:54:40 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Yes, Mac OSX !!!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-444870]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Hey, no one mentioned the Mac OS here!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-444870]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[deemon]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:13:09 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[We are doomed to upgrade...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-444866]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[We are doomed to upgrade &amp; upgrade &amp; upgrade... It is called &quot;progress&quot;. We will endlessly upgrade our software, our hardware, our tosters and our cars. There is a simple rule - do not rush, but don't be late. Be a mainstream person and you're will be well out of troubles.As for XP so I just ( 3 month ago ) installed it on the machine with AMD K6-2 333MHz 64Mb RAM and it works fine but slow.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-444866]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[deemon]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:01:59 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Yea, so what the reason for upgrades?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-444859]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I couldn't ever understand why do we need further upgrades then NT-W98-Office97? Just to provide some more intertainment for idle office users ( not to mention the Microsoft revenue )? Yes, they would definitely prefer to play with XP colorfull buttons then to stare at boring familiar spreadsheet...]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-444859]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[deemon]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:28:54 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[XP? It depends on what you have.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-425835]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I was at an XP Technical meeting this morning, A thousand people there and no Lunch provided... My Impression is that it depends What you all ready have. If You have Windows 2000 there is no rush. If you are buying a New Computer make sure it is powerful enough for XP and Buy it with XP.If you are using Windows 95, Say Goodbye...Upgrade to 98 at least!I think that the confusion will continue as you are going to find clients with all versions of Windows and difficult to find Stable System... Here at the University you can find many Versions of Word etc...By the time the Clients get used to XP there will be something New out (YP?).]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-425835]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Samuel C.]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2001 01:44:38 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Preferred  OS  is XP]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-421994]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Windows XP will prevail as the main OS of choice gaining more popularity, understanding and compatibility similarity as migrations from previous OS to new OS have occurred in the past.  XP has many improvements most notable speed and stability over previous OS's.  Compatibility with older applications and drivers plus more memory requirements pose problems.  However, XP will allow running in simulated other OS environments ie 95/98.  Memory has decreased in price but older mother boards may notsupport the higher levels needed to run XP ie 256 Meg comfortably]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-421994]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[wuot]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2001 04:12:06 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[windows xp]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-408518]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I am just curios if xp will work the first time around.  I have windows me.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-408518]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[mavdctalk@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 13 Oct 2001 09:06:17 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Which WINDOWS: NT4, 2K, XP]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-405893]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[In my opinion, for at least 1 year, WINDOWS 2000 Pro will be in the top of NT based OS.After release of Server XP maybe the things will change. Even WXP Pro works very well in W2K domains, for the momment, only for some new features the upgrade don't worth from W2K. From NT4, as an intermediate step, is a good choice.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-405893]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[adriangal88]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2001 22:19:00 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-405567]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I ran the Windows XP OS for about a month.  I found many problems with it.  It is supposed to be faster but when I went back to Windows 98 Second Edition, I found it to be a lot quicker.  Windows XP is also propriatory in that they built in a lot of features which are incompatible with the software for scanners, cameras, printers etc.  I have a HP printer with a feature of econo print.  Windows XP does not have this feature and it will not allow the HP software to be installed!  It is the same with Intel.Windows XP has some nice features but it also has quite a few drawbacks.  I won't move to the new Windows XP.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-405567]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[murel@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2001 11:02:31 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[here, here!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-405254]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'm learning Linux!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-405254]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[pwestfall@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2001 04:04:33 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[XP does not satisfy our needs......]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-405252]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Surprisingly I?ve found that using XP has caused me to loose functionality. I?ve had XP since Beta 1 and found that it is more a nuisance that anything. It changes the system options randomly, once I set an option, I do not need the system to secondguess me and decide on its own to revert back to the original state. The only aspect that I found useful as an administrator is the ability to control w/s remotely. Other than that, the simple fact that I had to deinstall my admin tools from my workstation made me decide that moving to XP would be to much of a hassle. I have discussed among the other people testing it out and everyone has reinstalled it and reinstalled W2K, no one found any redeeming value to it. We have decided that we much rather move to Linux as a desktop operating system, than to try to reengineer everything. The functionality of the tools available for that OS has made us reticent to even consider XP as an option. We are currently happy with W2K and will stay with it,but if we are required to change, we will move off the Windows bandwagon.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-405252]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[pwestfall@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2001 04:02:26 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[windows 2000 vs windows xp]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-404947]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[windows xp is incredibly stable and has more compatible with hardware!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-404947]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[doctorspeedy@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2001 23:11:30 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[XP Proffesional and 2000 Servers]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-404195]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I began looking into upgrade options for my comaany last year, since we all still run on 98, it was logical to move to a business platform.  I held off on doing the migration to 2000, with anticipation of XP.  We will now be cutting over 1stQ 2002 (after the first service pack.) I have already cut my NT servers over to 2000.  I am particulary interested in the remote feature for my traveling users.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-404195]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Mikied]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2001 02:03:29 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Win2000, I choose you!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-398638]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[After using NT, Win2000 is a welcomed change! I setup and am using 2000 on a brand new Compaq Raid-5 server from the box to production over the past month. While I wish the defragmenter were more versitile (schedule defrags on workstations from server, completely defrag the server including MFAT etc, give users capability to defrag), NT has no such capability which gave rise in my experience to an extended use of diskeeper lite. I particularly the customizable tools in 2000. In terms of XP,the major sticking point for me is the configuration registration game Microsoft seems to want to play with we network admins.  Less this annoyance, I would happily suggest migrating to this spruced up version of 2000, which I have fallen in love with.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-398638]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[melekali]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2001 01:48:17 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Both NT&amp;2K - Let Bill use XP ...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-389468]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[..., that'll teach him.for us:Win2K for the laptops to get back all the things NT missed (IR, USB, Hot-Swap, etc.)WinNT 4.0 for Workstations.  We just paid to upgrade all WS's to NT less than 2 years ago. (no discount for multiples either, what a jip) Until our Apps. require it, we'll stay put.Servers: WinNT except for the Terminal Server. (2K)I'm busy enough trying to figure out where they moved my NT utilities in 2K to even start thinking about XP.Bill can fund his next vacation from someone else's budget.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-389468]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Patrick - the slightly overwhelmed ...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2001 07:15:32 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Win2000 How do I Like It?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-388856]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I've tried Nt 4.0, Me, and Win 2000. Win 2k is best. But be aware, All your drivers and software must be Win 2k compatible! Or your system will drive you crazy.. I have upgraded all my software and drivers. And my system never pauses or crashes.                         BMN]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-388856]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[bnorvell@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2001 14:10:52 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[2000 not XP due to licencing]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-388616]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I will stick with Windows 2000 and not upgrade to XP due to licencing.  I am certified MCSE, but will be switching to Linux before I switch to XP.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-388616]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[ecsfam@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2001 04:33:51 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Win2K for me]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-388547]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'm just getting ready to move to Win2K (not an early adopter)  I have absolutely no plans to ever go to XP or its descendants unless there is a really, really earthshaking reason to do so.  About the only thing in XP that catches my eye is remote control feature.If I don't like Win2K, I will have no problem going back to NT on my main box and 982E on my other boxes.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-388547]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[kosmickat@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:18:46 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Win 2000 For me]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-388523]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Win NT is great, but it's seen it better days. In order to take advantage of technology such as USB, you need to upgrade to Win 2000. But, it really doesn't stop their. The ease of hardware installation as well as software is far superior with Win 2000. I also think it's a stabilier OS than NT. For the time being I will stay with Win 2000. When the new 64-bit architecture finally reaches the streets, maybe then I'll consider upgrading to XP to take advantage of the newer technology.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-388523]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Bohdan]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:50:11 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[YOU also, have the same problem......]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-380617]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I am an office leasing equipment provider and I have been in the computer industry for 25+ years (retail, telesales and leasing).There is NO way I will be suggesting that clients use XP in either form.I have numerous problems with clients who have existing peripherals who after upgrading or the purchase of a new computer system find IT DOSNT WORK.And in some cases is no longer supported under the new O/S. Yet the client doesn't require a new model (scanner, printer, camera etc...) he only wants his old one to work with the new computer.COMMENT;The industry is currently asking WHY there is a downturn in purchasing... I will tell them it is because we have manufactures who bring out new products with no thought to is it real required....MS have consistently released new versions each with their own problems with upgrading drivers etc. It is still happening.INTEL who are now stating that they will NO LONGER be producing PIII CUP's, WHY, because P4 after 9 months is not selling and they cant figure out WHY ???, you don't have to be a genius to figure out why.AS I was taught a long time ago you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.I would appreciate feedback on this e-mail.Regards Carl Forster New Zealandcarlf@xtra.co.nz]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/12-45928-380617]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[carlsf@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2001 00:12:06 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

