re: Windows Xp vs. Windows 2000
Friday, October 5, 2001 at 3:50 am
Windows XP Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by TonyW
(174 messages posted)
Business Users? Basically we need functionality and stability. Pretty front ends
etc only encites users who don't know too much to fiddle.
I go back to my reply to the original - if it ain't broke don't fix it!
On Friday, October 5, 2001 at 3:11 am, Guy wrote:
>Microsoft say XP is 'better' for Home users than 2000. by better I mean it has
got
>more bells and whistles. If you want all this extra software built into your OS
>- great.
>
>If you actually want a fast performing OS forget it. Windows XP runs approx 25%
>slower than windows 2000 (assuming you keep the H/W the same) across the board
-
>both single and multi tasking, it costs more than 2000 and has a new UI so that
using
>it is initially more difficult.
>
>If you think of windows 2000 as being NT 5.0 then XP is NT 5.1 it is not a major
>upgrade and I would not touch it with a barge pole - don't even get me started on
>how bad an option it is for business users
>
> - G
>
>
>On Wednesday, October 3, 2001 at 10:25 pm, Chris R. wrote:
>I've tried Windows Xp for about 20 days and found nothing that would make me want
>to deinstall windows 2000. in the matter of fact i started to hate it cause of its
>new look, but thats not the point..
>I would like to gather informations about whats really so good about Windows XP..
>what can it do that windows 2000 cant ? which advantiges did microsoft develop and
>what did they do wrong, so that i can make myself a picture of WinXP
>
>thnx and greetz
>Chris
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 |  |  | re: Windows Xp vs. Windows 2000 (TonyW: Fri, Oct 5, 2001, 3:50 am) |
| |
| |
| |
Return to the Windows XP Discussion Forum
|
|
