re: Windows Xp vs. Windows 2000
Monday, January 5, 2004 at 11:44 am
Windows XP Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by D Morgan
(1 messages posted)
I have a p3 800 with 256megs and I dual boot with 2000 and XP and Linux mandrake
9.
I have been using both XP pro and 2000 since they were available.
In my opinion 2000 is faster and a little more stable.
XP has many new features as well as more services running in the back ground.
Basically XP is cool if you have faster hardware to take advantages of the extra
features and services without compromising performance.
I think 2000 is a better choice for business use and home use if your an expert.
XP seems a bit dumbed down to me,it seems like they tried to make it do every thing,
giving experts shit they didn't want and average users shit they didn't need.
2000 at first wasn't a good choice for gamers because of the lack of driver support.
XP seemed at first to be better for games but by now you can do just as well with
2000.
Over all I think people in the know will simply dual boot both with Linux included
as I have.
As for which I use the most? 2000 gets my choice.
One other thing, my 2000 seems to be running slower with each new update from MS.
Could it be that the updates are simply turning my 2000 into XP?
I don't know but on a bare bones level they have the same kernel.
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 |  | re: Windows Xp vs. Windows 2000 (D Morgan: Mon, Jan 5, 2004, 11:44 am) |
| |
| |
| |
Return to the Windows XP Discussion Forum
|
|
