xp v. 2000

Message

richarddd · #1 Post by **richarddd** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 9:45 am

I recently got an X31 and an extra HDD, so I've been playing with various configurations, including 2000 sp4 on one drive and xp sp1 (turning off all of the fluff I can) on the other. I'm hard pressed to notice any meaningful difference between the two OSs. Given the passion this issue sometimes generates, the lack of difference surprises me.

What am I missing?

s0larian · #2 Post by **s0larian** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 11:00 am

Hardware support in XP is better than in W2K, USB, wireless, integrated DSL Driver, newer IIS version, Remotedesktop Software, Firewall, UPnP, probably some Group Polices, better laptop power mangagement support ...

Now with the SP2 of course there is even more difference. I never understood why some people change back to W2K on new machines with XP preinstalled. If it's just the fluff, everyone is free to turn it off.

#3 Post by **jdhurst** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 11:06 am

I concur with everything s0larian said. I would also add that XP (especially with SP2) is newer and has a longer support cycle starting from now. Also, on an LCD screen, Clear Type (only available on XP) is to die for.

I used Windows 2000 from the day it came out, and was very pleased with it. I had it on an older and slower desktop and on older and slower company laptops. I made the switch when buying a much faster desktop and buying my own much faster laptop. Both came pre-installed with XP Pro, both are at SP2 today, both work outstandingly well, and there is no reason for me to look back.

Having said all that, the old desktop got a PowerLeap CPU upgrade to 1.4Ghz, and is happily running in the basement with Windows 2000 doing odd jobs.

... JDHurst

#4 Post by **K. Eng** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 11:50 am

Most if not all computers sold today are fast enough to run XP as smoothly as 2000, even with all the junk turned on.

I use XP because driver support is generally better than 2000, and most new hardware comes with XP drivers.

richarddd · #5 Post by **richarddd** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 12:25 pm

s0larian wrote:Hardware support in XP is better than in W2K, USB, wireless, integrated DSL Driver, newer IIS version, Remotedesktop Software, Firewall, UPnP, probably some Group Polices, better laptop power mangagement support ...

I haven't noticed any diff in USB, I don't use wireless often (has the debate between xp and access connect been settled), don't use DSL (cable or T1), don't use IIS, remotedesktop seems a security danger, I use another firewall, not really familiar with uPnP, group policies does not seem relevant to a single user notebook. How is power mgmt different?

JDHurst wrote:I would also add that XP (especially with SP2) is newer and has a longer support cycle starting from now. Also, on an LCD screen, Clear Type (only available on XP) is to die for.

A longer support cycle could be helpful. If I turn on ClearType, "il" (as in file) has red between the letters, which is quite annoying, so I'm back to standard font smoothing.

I'll probably go with XP because it's newer and is likely to get better support.

hausman · #6 Post by **hausman** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 12:42 pm

richarddd wrote:If I turn on ClearType, "il" (as in file) has red between the letters, which is quite annoying, so I'm back to standard font smoothing.

Have you "tuned" your ClearType settings? http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cle ... uner/1.htm

richarddd · #7 Post by **richarddd** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 1:06 pm

hausman wrote:Have you "tuned" your ClearType settings? http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cle ... uner/1.htm

Doesn't help. I get a reddish to brownish-reddish ghosting around or between some letters with ClearType turned on. Other than that, ClearType does make text appear smoother.

jjackson02 · #8 Post by **jjackson02** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 6:58 pm

I've had my copy of Windows 2000 since it came out, and I've grown to love it. It's by far the OS of choice for mobile computing

richarddd · #9 Post by **richarddd** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 7:47 pm

XP sp2 with all the glitz turned off is very similar to 2000. The main advantages to xp seem to be better wireless support and that it's likely to be supported for a longer amount of time.

DaveH · #10 Post by **DaveH** » Wed Sep 15, 2004 2:13 pm

Glitz and junk... what extraneous stuff in XP are you talking about? Other than theme and fading menus, how is XP any more heavily laden than 2K?

I've been using 2K for about 2.5 years now and use it at work... nice straight-forward OS. My HD crashed, so I loaded XP plus I got a new ThinkPad loaded with XP... after returning the settings to "Classic", what's the difference between the two?

So far... file/print sharing has been easier, boot-up is faster (though that could be due to having a "virgin" system vs all those annoying programs that work their way into the start-up), and intergrated image viewing that's slightly annoying.

richarddd · #11 Post by **richarddd** » Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:55 pm

DaveH wrote:Glitz and junk... what extraneous stuff in XP are you talking about?.

settings->control panel->system->advanced->performance->visual effects->adjust for best performance

xp v. 2000

xp v. 2000

Who is online