General discussion


Windows 2000 verses XP

By eflow ·
I haven't installed Windows XP because I am told it is very problemattic. What is the advantage of XP over 2000.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

What type of Environment?

by mack_shane In reply to Windows 2000 verses XP

Are you talking about a network setup with servers or just a small workgroup of a few computers or just a standalone computer?

Collapse -

Window 2000 verses XP

by eflow In reply to What type of Environment?

I will be initially installing XP in a standalone in order to get an understanding of the OS.

Collapse -

Advantages of XP

by Vawns In reply to Window 2000 verses XP

In terms of stability, it's on par with 2000 but in terms of usability it's much better. The start menu has been adapted so that you can quickly go to you most frequently used programs, there's enhanced plug and play adaptability, you can customise the way you log in. It really depends on what you want to use it for.

Collapse -

Plug and Play

by ND_IT In reply to Advantages of XP

XP is just as reliable as 2000. I have migrated much of my users to XP, bypassing 2000. Plug and Play capability is better enhanced, and some of the new remote features are really handy when it comes to troubleshooting remote site users.

Collapse -

Like **** it is.....

by LordInfidel In reply to Plug and Play

This is the problem with people. Upgrading to the latest and greatest because it is the latest and greatest.

Fine, XP has some extra added features. But those same features also present problems.

I decided to give XP a chance and tried it out.

Securing it was a nightmare. But then again, my definition of securing an OS and the joe **** user's definition are 2 very different terms.

The user interface is anything but intuitive. And I really despise the big crayola crayon kindergarten style graphics. (Same beef I have with RH 8 native x-windows, it looks like it was built for a 2 year old)

No end user (on a corp netwk) needs the ability to have remote access to their desktop. No corp user should be able to configure theirown personal firewall.

XP home is just like ME/98. The security sucks. Even if you install it on NTFS.

XP is just a money making scheme by M$ to force an OS down the consumers throat. And to "ease" us into the licensing scheme.

For me, 2K sp2 with hotfixes and my own special blend of secruity techniques will be as far as I go in the M$ world until .NET is fully tested and intergrated to the desktop OS.

There was no reason at all for M$ to develop XP except to make cash.

Collapse -

Yea....What Lord Said...

by radiic In reply to Like hell it is.....

Stick with 2k. Especially on a Corp.Network


Collapse -

Stick with 2K!

by ebilly In reply to Yea....What Lord Said...

Have you been reading the security bullitens? There are more security concerns with XP than 2K!! Why? Because 2K has been around longer and M$ has had more time to secure it. A hole is found in XP everyday. Although this is my corporate advice. If for home use... go XP!

Collapse -


by djent In reply to Like hell it is.....

But only if you have M$ shares.

Collapse -

You would think that me being a geek

by LordInfidel In reply to advantage=$$$$$$$$$$$$$

That I would of have bought tons of shares of M$.

But alas I did'nt and so i toil in the underbelly of computing.

(reminds me of the moview frequency and Yahoo)

Collapse -

Right On!

by JackOfAllTech In reply to Like hell it is.....

I couldn't agree more. I simply despise 'simple user' interfaces. They just get in my way. XP is the AOL of OSs, if it's simple enough for an idiot to use, then all the idiots of the world will use it and expect us to support them. I feel the same way about computers as I do about any technical discipline: If you are too lazy or stupid to at least read a book and figure it out on your own, then LEAVE IT ALONE!


Related Discussions

Related Forums