re: Windows Xp vs. Windows 2000
Saturday, February 7, 2004 at 7:54 am
Windows XP Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by Paul T
(1 messages posted)
I'm much in the same situation as Rob was in here. I'm looking for a more reliable
MS system to replace W98 and WME. I need the MS mostly for the printer drivers that
Linux lacks and also for public compatability between systems (many people still
use W95/98). I can copy the MS files into Linux (fm Linux) and work on them with
the shell/program tools to get serious work done. Then copy back for printer use
or give work to MS OS people on CDs and floppys. If this is the case then it seems
that I'll be (1.) going the W2K way or (2.) just wait a couple of years and try out
the new projected MS OS if it will support MS legacy software ? I think XP is to
much in this case. Any support for me to go the W2K route??
On Friday, February 6, 2004 at 3:39 pm, Rob wrote:
>I upgraded from Win 98 to XP and was amazed at the difference. My friend told me
>to go 2K and I never looked back. Basically, as everyone has reiterated, the bottom
>line is - XP is 2K with bells, whistles, and bugs. If Microsoft made cars, the
XP
>car loses horsepower by having a fancy paint job, an automatic transmission, and
>a leather interior (oh and every so often you need to pull off the side of the road
>and turn on and off the ignition). If you want performance and reliability, stick
>with win 2k....it might have a dull paint job a cloth interior, and a manual transmission,
>but it will blow the doors off of an XP.
>
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 |  |  | re: Windows Xp vs. Windows 2000 (Paul T: Sat, Feb 7, 2004, 7:54 am) |
| |
| |
| |
Return to the Windows XP Discussion Forum
|
|
