|
|
|
re: W2K vs XP?'
Friday, December 1, 2006 at 6:36 pm
Windows 2000 Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by Jude Nihal Fernando
(113 messages posted)
Here is my conclusion. I believe that Windows 2000 is very Stable on old computers
from Pentium 200 MHz. all the way to a modern PC. If you have a Pentium 4 1.2 to
2.0, XP and 2000 will run at the same speed, but 2000 will be better than multitasking,
but a processor higher than 2.0 GHz, which are the HT and Dual Core Processors, Windows
XP will take advantages over the processor features which will make the system run
much better than 2000, but I like 2000 better if you have a Pentium 3 Class or an
early Pentium 4 Class Processor. If you compare 2000 Pro to XP Home, then 2000 Pro
will be way better, because it has more features, but if you compare it with XP Pro,
2000 will be good for older, middle class PC's and XP will be good for Newer Monsters.
On Friday, September 6, 2002 at 12:24 pm, brian slater wrote:
>I have a question about What's
>the difference between Windows 2000 and Windows XP?:
>
>I heard a lot of bad things so far about XP, wont load software it doesnt like (has
>to be M$ certified), it crashes and locks up badly and worst of all you give M$
control
>over your PC
>
>I have upgrade from W98 after years of regular crashes and unreliable performance
>(thank goodness for Norton System Works, you cannot be without it on W98)
>
>My observation so far is that W2K is far more stable and fault tolerant. It pretty
>much works like a dream (excep for some bad software from the Multimedia industry
>- very flaky stuff. But I did get a megacrash and it wiped out the OS. I had to
buy
>an additional harddrive and reinstall. This was cause by my trying to fit a Matrox
>AGP video card (they didnt bother to say get the latest drivers before installation.
> However, 2 weeks work down the drain (not data, which i revovered, but reinstallation
>of apps)
>
>That aside, W2K does seem ok. Ive now got to go to great lengths to protect is from
>the net. Get mozilla, and a different mailer, I am told. Ive got Norton Firewall,
>Is it good enough. Ive had several backorifice attempts alarmed. Its strange that
>these only occur in the wee small hours? I suspect some little nerd in my ISP playing
>around on the night shift. Do you agree?
>
>Grateful for your comments, to share is to support the common cause
>
>Brian
>
- Written in response to:
- W2K vs XP?' (brian slater: Friday, September 6, 2002 at 12:24 pm)
There are presently no replies to this message.
|
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 |  | re: W2K vs XP?' (Jude Nihal Fernando: Fri, Dec 1, 2006, 6:36 pm) |
| |
| |
Return to the Windows 2000 Discussion Forum
|
|
|
|
