1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Win2K VS WinXP

Discussion in 'Bits & Bytes' started by Coot, Jan 31, 2003.

  1. Coot

    Coot Passed Away January 7, 2010

    Okay, most of us have to use a MS operating system at some point or another...be it for work or school etc. I have several different MS machines that I use daily...some Win98, some NT4, some Win2K and 1 WinXP. IMHO, Win2K is the most reliable and most stable of all of them...as evidenced yet again by the build I did of a couple of new machines.

    As a fairly regular linux user, I appreciate what MS tried to achieve with Win2K, and I find nothing really redeeming about WinXP. I mean sure, they made some configurations more automatic, but I find the OS itself too invasive. It makes assumptions and auto configures based on those, and so far, it's proven to be more work to fix that rather than to configure Win2K manually. It seems to be more multimedia friendly, but there's nothing equivalent that you can't do in Win2K

    I guess my question for those who are XP fans, is what the hell is it that makes you like this OS?
  2. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Dunno...I've resisted XP, myself. I still use W2K on just about everything I run.

    Though I understand XP is easier to have naughty video chats with. :love:

  3. Stiofan

    Stiofan Master Po

    Most people who are fans of WXP over W2K probably migrated straight to it from W98 or ME.

    <small>edited, as now that I'm more sober I see I mixed them up before!</small>
  4. mrRT

    mrRT Tech Mod


    Here's what I have found so far. There is a great following for both OS's. The folks that really like one swear by it..hehehehe

    For the WinXP crowd. It seems that alot of folks use XP because it is the latest and greatest and they had to have it. Generally any of the systems being shipped today from the big manufacturers, i.e. IBM, Dell, Compaq, And Gateway all come with XP loaded. You really have to search for a model from them to find one that they load with Win2K or specifically ask to have the machine loaded with Win2K.
    Why do they do this??? Real easy....WinXP does alot for the average user. Alot of things that required a certain knowledge set to accomplish in Win2K are done in a couple of steps with WinXP. And who would these companies be targeting for this???the Average Home user who doesn't want to mess with things or who has had a rough time in the past with OS and configuration. So it works perfectly for a whole bunch of folks.
    Now don't misunderstand my statement. I by no means am implying XP is for dummies. It simply cuts alot of setup and frustration time for a big slice of the general public. It has great support, alot of drivers loaded that users had to search for in the past, and is very stable.

    The Win2K crowd is different. They seem to be a group of folks who are either comfortable using Win2K and will stay there or folks that like the feel of the OS. It is also an extremely stable OS and it works well for a large portion of the population. I think this section of people are ones who are not just the average home user. (No disrespect intended) .

    I don't know.... I have clients that use both OS's too..hehehehe

    So what is the attraction....beats me.. I think it similar to the Ford/Chevy thing I guess.

    Personal Example...... I have Win2K loaded on my machine. I do alot of graphics work and find it works best for me. Sandy had me take Win2K off her machine and put on XP. She absolutely loves it and swears Win2k doesn't work well for her. She does alot of email, surfin, and Word/Excel work.

    Again these are only my opinions (YMMV) and I have benn wrong in the past...hehehehehe
  5. mikeky

    mikeky Member

    For me, WinXP has been slightly more stable for some applications. Actually, no crashes at all with XP, compared to a few with Win2K.
  6. Jedi Writer

    Jedi Writer Guest

    I like XP the best. Ive used Windows 3.1, 95, 98, Me, NT, and 2000.

    XP like 2K is built on the NT code and is a completely separate OS from the 95, 98, and Me family. They are not worth discussing at this point in time unless you are stuck with one of them, which I am not.

    For the home user or consumer XP is clearly the best MS OS in every way overall! It runs tons more hardware and software than 2k. It is just as stable or more so than 2k now. Any perception that 2k is more stable lies in the fact it may appear to be more stable simply because it runs so much less than XP and capable of doing less that it isnt exposed to anywhere near the number of uses and software applications or drivers that cause a problem one might encounter with XP.

    Most problems with the current version of XP can be improved or eliminated by intelligently switching a few things off in XP or altering some settings.

    Bottom line is that whatever OS you used you have to use what you like, regardless of why you like it.

    Look at how many hundreds of different type vehicles we drive. Why dont we all drive just one type of SUV or passenger car? It is an emotional preference to a large degree why we buy what we do.

    We all are the same in that regard!

    Linux, XP, 2K, and Apple are all outstanding operating systems.
  7. wapu

    wapu Veteran Member

    I got XP Pro for home because I had 2K at work and most of the newer computers I was seeing had XP on them. I'll take either. However, With XP I like the built in Zipping feature. I do not need to put Winzip on a floppy and install it on some of the remote machines I work with. I also like the filmstrip view in Windows Explorer. I have been able to do away with AC/DSEE and the crappy software that came with my camera. But, I can overcome those things in Win2K so other than needing to support XP and not having a clue where things were in it Win2K would be fine.
  8. Twingo

    Twingo Registered User

    Games for the most part run and perform better in XP with my experience. Win2k was not meant to be a desktop OS but a workstation type OS and didn't really try too hard for Multimedia and Game support. XP spent LOTS of time working with game compatibility for both new and old games. They did a good job. I prefer win2k for a work type enviroment, but XP for home use.
  9. Techie2000

    Techie2000 The crowd would sing:

    I personally like XP because of more hardware compatibility, better for gaming/multimedia, and although I always feel most at home in the command line (my first computers only used the command line.) I'm a sucker for slick looking GUIs. Although the default theme in XP looks ugly, the silver one it nice. I have learned that although XP sucks at certain things (managing NIC cards and network connections it will keep a copy of old settings. I had to manually delete the old NIC stuff from my registry) it generally has the same featureset as 2K plus a little more (except for Home Edition which you lose some stuff).
  10. RRedline

    RRedline Veteran MMember

    After using every version of Windows quite a lot since Win95, I have to say that I do like XP Pro the best. Win2K comes in a VERY close second place for me. I have heard others complain of stability with XP, but I have been using it for over a year and a half, and I have yet to actually experience a system crash. I used Win 2K for about a year, and I did have the occasional crash which required a reboot. Due to stability and hardware/software compatibility, I prefer XP, at least for home use. One of the complaints I often hear against XP is that it is a system resource hog, especially with RAM. This is true, but as long as you've got at least 1 GHZ CPU and 256MB RAM, XP will run very smoothly. And a system with that much power is on the cheap end these days.

    Has anyone actually used Remote Assistance between to XP machines yet(I'm not talking about Remote Desktop which is another wonderful tool)? A friend of mine, who lives two hours away from me, asked me to help her with an issue she was having with her email, and I connected to her machine with Remote Assistance. It's an awesome tool, especially considering how simple it is to initiate a session. It's all built right into the OS(a good thing for most, but some will say bad...whateva).

    I'm sure someone will tell me about a security flaw in Remote Assistance now! :)
  11. Domh

    Domh Full Member

    XP is the only OS to come along from MS that Ive found to be excellent from a usability and interface perspective, which is my professional specialty.

    Granted, its pathetically insecure blahblahblah but its stable as hell, looks and runs very well, and is extremely user friendly.

    The only time Ive had trouble with it is when I didnt follow the instructions that were right in front of me.

    Ive always said, if you play in Bills world, stay there, play with all of his toys, enjoy them. Once you bring somebody elses toys into the park, Bill gets cranky and leaves with his ball.


Share This Page