Windows 2000 vs. Windows XP

[Racer^]

I agree with koby. Win2k is rock stable for me and supports any hardware I've tried to use. It also has a good GUI (XP's is no better) and support for almost everything XP supports. Almost every game out there has a Win2k patch by now, and I've run many DOS games (like Doom, etc) in Win2k just fine - with sound.

As for comparing Windows to Linux, well, the Windows GUI is about 10X better than XWindows...even with the latest Gnome/KDE. However, if you NEVER use a GUI, then Linux is better and more stable. Hence, Linux is a good server/developer platform, but Windows is much better for end users; especially gamers.
So who is WinXP for? Well, those people that don't really know what they want in an OS...but the salesman can pitch that its the newest, prettiest, most virus friendly OS yet. Ok, thats a little harsh, but is at least partially true.

------------------
TBird 880 (oc 110 x 8) /
ABit KT7 (YH) VIA 4.29 /
256 MB PC133 RAM /
TNT2 16MB (oc 160/160) Det 7.58 /
Maxtor 5.1GB 85120A8 & 40GB 5T040H4 /
ESS 1869 & NetGear FA311 10/100 NIC /
Win2k Pro SP2

[haze69]

i have 98SE right now and am thinking bout upgrading to win2k, now for win2k should i change my hard drive to NTFS or will it still run fine on fat32? what are the differences?

[kapeman]

One of the main reasons I upgraded to XP Pro is the ability to Terminal Server into any XP box. 2000 only allows this on servers. I work from home a lot and this can be a real life saver!

------------------
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.
Aesop

[Mr. Flush]

Originally posted by haze69:
i have 98SE right now and am thinking bout upgrading to win2k, now for win2k should i change my hard drive to NTFS or will it still run fine on fat32? what are the differences?

With my experience NTFS is a better choice for XP and Win2k, because it's the native file system of those two. FAT32 was introduced with Win98 and it's not bad, but a NTFS is far superior.
NTFS has a more efficient "file indexing" with helps when you have you system locked up and you want to reset manually. Normally with Win98se, before the OS booted (when it was reseted manually) it would run scandisk and you could have bad file clusters. With NTFS it doesn't need to run scandisk and you don't need to worry about 'bad file clusters' because of how the file indexing works. Anyway this is way to long for me so I'll hurry up with the rest.
NTFS is known for:
Efficient File Indexing
Win2k & XP native file system
Can use up almost all you the hd and still get good performance
Improved Securtiy

Alright I'm outta here...

[qmul]

stick with win2k! i decided to go back to win2k after using winXP for a month. winXP sucked... it was slower running apps and the only good thing about it was boot up time. the network options in XP are a joke.

------------------
The person who said it can't be done should not interrupt the person doing it

Dell Insprion 4000
PIII 700
320MB RAM
8MB ATI Rage 128 Mobility
20GB IBM DJSA 220 HDD
Windows XP Pro

[IT_Slave]

Originally posted by Gladius:
I currently have Win2K Pro and am thinking of switching to XP. Is this a good idea? I do a lot of gaming and need the best performance possible. You can check my system specs by clicking the link in my sig.

I run Windows XP Pro on my home desktop and Windows 2000 Pro on my laptop. I have an equal list of likes and dislikes of both.

I think overall there's much better driver support from various component manufacturers for Win2k. The implementation of Creative's LiveWare is better, for one, IMO.

FAT32 was introduced with Win98 and it's not bad, but a NTFS is far superior.

FAT32 was introduced with Windows 95 OEM Service Release 2.


------------------
PIII 850 @ 952 (112x8.5)
256 megs Crucial PC133 CAS2
Radeon 8500 Retail
Adaptec Firewire
SB Live Platinum 5.1
Quick network
My 3DMark2001 Score

[This message has been edited by IT_Slave (edited January 08, 2002).]

[dudephil]

I wouldn't switch at all. Maybe dual boot but not switch. I have them both and I like 2k over XP. When they get all the bugs and drivers fixed for XP then maybe.

------------------
Enjoy life. There's plenty of time to be dead.
"Live as if your were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever."
-Mahatma Gandhi

[fbs1992]

Originally posted by qmul:
stick with win2k! i decided to go back to win2k after using winXP for a month. winXP sucked... it was slower running apps and the only good thing about it was boot up time. the network options in XP are a joke.

i think we all know why it ran so slowly

P4 [email protected] 133mhz fsb
gainward gf3ti 500
sb audigy platinum
creative inspire 5300
256mb PC800 ram
2x60GB hd
16x pioneer dvd rom
24x lite-on cdrw




------------------
Ma$e

[GeForce]

one think i can tell ya' is that if you have Windows 2000 Pro with all of that latest bug fixes and upgrades, stick with it.
Dont bother to upgrade form windows 2k pro to XP pro right at the moment. wait, Microsoft are releasing some bug fixes for XP...

------------------
Have A Nice Day!

***My System***

Got Hardware? (GH?)

AMD's Forum

VR-Zone Hardware Forums

[fdeaton]

I would definately stick with 2K at least for the near term. I keep hearing far too many security issues with XP right now.

------------------
abit vh6II
Celeron 600 oc'd to 898
IBM 30 gig 60 gxp deskstar
Matrox G450
1 gig crucial ram
Win 2000
Philips cheap sound card
Mitsumi CD
HP CD-RW (from Wal-Mart)
A-Open tower case w/300psu

A learning experience and everyone here is just a ton of help!