re: Windows 2000 vs. XP
Tuesday, February 12, 2002 at 12:56 pm
Windows 2000 Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by Curt R
(1315 messages posted)
I haven't played with XP yet, but I can recommend 2000. I've found it to be a
very stable OS. I'm sure XP is as well and from what I've heard from friends that
are now using it, it's a good OS. I think you may have some serious trouble getting
either 2000 or XP to run on such old hardware. You can go to microsofts web site
and read the spec's on system requirements for both operating systems and peruse
their HCL (hardware compatibility list) to see if your present equipment is capable
of running either OS. I highly recommend you check the HCL and minimum system requirements
before you purchase anything, you will likely find you can't run either OS without
upgrading hardware first. I wanted to ask, have you given any thought to upgrading
your server? 2000 server is far superior to NT 4.0
On Tuesday, February 12, 2002 at 12:21 pm, Scott Wilson wrote:
>I am managing an office of 35 users. Most of us are still using Win95/98.
>It's time to upgrade. We are planning upgrade to W2k or XP. We will most likely
>be using Office XP (as we get non-profit pricing). Our Domain server is NT 6 (sp6a).
>
>
>Does anyone have any thoughts on which OS would better suit us? My experience with
>W2K is that it is pretty stable. I am already overworked as it is and want the
least
>amount of problems to work with. How is XP with older hardware 3,4,5 years old
hardware?
>
>TIA
>
- Written in response to:
- Windows 2000 vs. XP (Scott Wilson: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 at 12:21 pm)
Responses to this message:
|
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 |  | re: Windows 2000 vs. XP (Curt R: Tue, Feb 12, 2002, 12:56 pm) |
|
