I don't like XP. Is it just me? 1

[llefebure]

Greetings everyone.

Do you like XP?

I just thought I would collect the opinions of my peers to see what you all think. How do you like XP compared to 2000 and 98? Do you recommend it to your customers?


My opinion:
So, I'm 1 test away from being an MCSE and have half a dozen other misc certs. I've worked with about 50 machines running XP home and pro. I have yet to be impressed with XP. I have a strong dislike for XP. So strong that I have begun to recommend my customers NOT get XP and instead order 2000 Pro on all new PCs. It is my impression that XP flat out doubles the TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) when compared to 2000 Pro. What I mean is that it takes double the time to setup/configure and double the time to do anything as a User running applications. I will speculate that it will be about a year before I recommend my customers buy XP over 2000. I think it will take Intel that long to get a processor fast enough to run XP the way it should be - without those nasty delays.

Your turn:
Is it just me being an old-school windows 2000 die-hard or do the rest of you see it the same way?


Why is it that Microsoft is always bragging about how XP is so much better than 98. I have yet to see Microsoft say XP is better than 2000. Why is that?

Note: I do expect a more biased opinion here than say on the Windows 2000 forum.

Please, I don't wish to start a flame war here. I just want your honest opinions.

 

[Jacklivedhere]

i found that xp improved nearly everything on my computer, and my proccessor runs at 500Mhz, a common trend i found with xp is the increase in d/l rate on the internet. has anyone else noticed that? one problem is the driver compatability.. xps drivers sometimes conflict with drivers i want to install and i have to go out of my way to get rid of the promlem such as getting the latest patch or reinstalling the drivers etc. Games run faster, no freezups, increased connection speed, although the funny thing is that my windows loads up in the same amount of time it takes my friend whos processor is a 1.2Ghz, so far a reckon its better that 98 or so double thumbs up for xp

 

[ColdPhreze]

I install and run Win 2000 Pro, Server, and Advanced Server, and Windwos XP Pro...

XP Pro is my preferred choice (except for the servers of course). There isn't much difference between XP Pro and 2000 Pro, except boot time. 2000 Pro takes about two minutes to load where XP Pro takes 30 seconds on an Athlon T-Bird 1.4GHz machine.

With all the options being essentially the same, stability the same, XP having more driver support, and XP booting faster, XP is the operating system of choice!
KyferEz

 

[Hungster]

Exactly, but XP gets out and in gaming slower than Win2k

if you wish, .NET server is the XP version of Server

 

[alvala]

I'm starting to hate XP home & Pro as I haven't being able to run into a NT domain...

If someone knows how, please let me know...

Beto Valdés

 

[MA5]

I love all MS OSes. If they worked I would be out of business!

 

[Hungster]

yes i agree with Ma5, if you use your windows properly
most important is to install and configure it properly first time, then it will not have as many problem as people described

i seen Win95 version a still runing like a rock, hardly need to reboot, and yet this is a third party software was customed wrote business software

 

[MadJock]

I'm running XP Pro on a PII-350 with 192MB RAM. It is extremely slow - but then I only use it an an internet connection server for my flat!

I have nothing but praise for XP in thee simplicity of install and networking.

I've been running XP Pro on the above machine for three months and on my laptop (1.06MHz - 256MB) for 6 months and have yet to experience any real problems.

Graeme website:

http://www.graeme-taylor.co.uk

 

[smythe]

I love Windows XP, it's great! I have no problems with it, the only problem, or potential problem I see are it's hardware requirements.

But it never crashes on me, I also love Win 98 and refused to upgrade to 2000 until XP cam out, for some reason I never liked 2000.

 

[smythe]

I think the 4 wheel drive truck analogy with XP is very good, I've been running it for quite a while, and it hardly ever crashes on me, except once, when it did, it REALLY crashed, wouldn't even boot up except in safe mode, I eventaully ended up doing a complete re-install.

It happened after installing a printer, I guess make sure to check all hardware requirements before installing anything new and make sure XP supports it.

 

[scholar24]

To make it short I have ran both 2000 and XP on my current system and have to admit that until I worked out the XP bugs and necessary configs I was skeptical and even switched back to 2k once. After doing that and realizing that 2k doesn't compare to XP I switched back to XP. Windows 2000 just doesn't multi-task as well as XP. I can run 10 open windows with XP wheras in 2k it would stutter and crash. Granted it's not a huge difference between to to systems behind the scenes and cost of licensing for 2k and XP is about the same, I have actually found OEM copies of Xp to be cheaper, as was group licensing. To each their own I guess


Tom Caldwell
NexusSoft Consulting
"Run XP just sold a client 2k"

 

[buzz6pack]

I hate XP ..... every machine ive tried to install it to has had major install problems.Can i say this?i prefer ME to that pile of shite Microsoft call an operating system.Ive found Redhat linux easier to install and configure than anything microsoft have ever produced....
Recently i could not get a realtek 8139 based card to install , three days later after various driver updates,visits to XP support site ,still no working NIC card
im now so disgruntled with XP i wouldnt recommend it to a sinclair spectrum owner , id recommend the disc as a very expensive drinks coaster ......
Disgruntled ex XP user !

 

[Hungster]

i am sorry to see you are having a terrible luck with xp

for sure i can tell you, i have absolutely no problem what so ever with realtek chipset nic especially with 8139A, B, C

don't know where you get your xp from, mine can't directly from Microsoft Open license media

matter of fact, the only one i have problem with is win ME
the rest are getting more and more stable as Ms releases, from Win9x, Win NT, Win2k, WinXP

 

[Scotsdude]

Must admit, I've installed XP Pro several times at work, connecting to NT and 2K servers withou any problems. I also run XP Pro at home, on a Duron 950Mhz with 128Mb of ram, with no problems whatsoever.

before that, I had it running on an old 500Mhz system, and I kid you not, it was like I put a fecking turbo system into it....speed increases AND stability.

Opposed to 2k, I'm not too sure yet. 2k has been around long enough that with the service packs installed, its solid as a rock. I think XP will get better results after the release of the first XP service pack. I'm happy using XP or 2K, although I do miss some of the features in XP that aren't essential, just nice touches or logical extensions to hwat 2K can do.....

Scotsdude

 

[christheprogrammer]

I had the same troubles as buzz6pack on 2 of the 3 machines that I tried to install XP on. I was VERY choked at the time, BSOD half-way thru installing. Pissed me off. BUT: I learned alot by doing it. I had to learn what all the settings in BIOS do, and determined that one of my 256MB RAM sticks was toast. I am one of those people who prefer to learn about systems as opposed to sticking a cd in and going for coffee. So, Microsoft, thanks for helping me learn more about hardware... (not sure which side I am on now... hmmm). Anyways, what it comes down to is that XP is like anything else, it has its good points and its bad points. Nothing is perfect. Chris says: "It's time for a beer."

 

[Guest_imported]

JUST AN FYI

It only takes me 45 minutes to format a 5 gig partition and reload WinXP Pro inluding all hardware drivers. So, I don't know what all the hoopla's about setup and configuration times.

 

[hannahsh]

newbie computer yuppies

god I have read it all, xp this w2k that 98 this and all that. 99% of ms os and apps go through cycles and some are good the odd one bad and most are fantastic - else go and play with novell, unix or dare I say it mac.

without windows, your pc would be a load of pants, ms have made the computer what it is and if you were to go back 15 years or even 10 most of you would still be using your playstations.

the IT industry has been messed up by you nurds that just have to run the latest thing, in fact win98 and office 2k with a few add ons is perfectly acceptable and it only needs a p2 and 128mb ram. tell me one thing xp does that you cant do on 98 and as for stability, buy good quality kit and use the right drivers and patches and all ms software is stable enough - even unix crashs sometimes. most crashes are due to hardware and drivers errors not windows..........

ps I run xp 98 and NT4 W2kAS at home all on compaq's and there 100% reliable !!!

the bottom line is that the newer software just gobbles up what speed you can buy new, where as older kit is just as good and as fast but at a substantially lower TCO.......

no wonder the IT industry is a mess, I wouldnt recommend anyone upgrading from 98 unless they have specific reasons, and as yet I have found none !!!!!!!! only w2kAS is a worthwhile investment and exchange 2000 over its nt version. Active directory is nice old and trusted technology - knicked from the unix bods or sco to be more exact.

back to the original question xp is nice and pretty. But, why spend so much on a computer to run it when for 10% of the price you can have all the same functionality on your 98 machine.

its just microsoft(ms) making everyone buy something new and expensive to line their greedy pockets, as for activeation its a joke and thank god it has been cracked !!

 

[wolluf]

Gambler162 - bully for you - haven't got XP to install in under an hour yet - every new NS o/s takes longer to install than previous.

PS. Has anyone here tried QNX - 5 minute install (pity there's not lots of software for it, but having given up on Linux as every distribution I tried didn't quire worl on any of our PCs, I was totally impressed with QNX.

 

[Hungster]

I don't care what other B*tching about Windows, what does it do if you can't play friggin games on it

that's what i enjoy is to play games, look at what Microsoft did now, bought out a outstanding Navision software the newly successful ERP from Europe

Watch out others like Progress DB, SQL is on their way up
i loaded up Red Hat before, i agree it is very stable and fast, but the type of game i enjoy still under Windows

Age of Empires, Age of Kings, Diablo, Diablo 2, StarCraft, WarCraft 3, Unreal, Red Alert 2, and so on...

 

[katalist]

I've had XP since the beginning of April 2002.
I thought it would be faster than Win98 but it isn't.
The logon and the shutdown is so slow that I go get cleaned up or eat breakfast and then come back to the pc to use it.
I got XP with a new pc and am thinking about formatting it to Win98. If I do this, the co. that I bought the pc from will not support it. I don't understand this as it is still the same pc and my 2nd from this co.
I love the speed of RoadRunner and now have an OS that is slower than say... "molasses". Why do I have to trade stability for speed?
So, should I go back to 98 or deal with it?
thanx for your time in advance,
Kat

P.S. after previewing my post, I notice my sig doesn't come out right, why's that?
-
(*:/*\:*)
(º·.¸(¨*·.¸ ¸.·*¨)¸.· º)
«.·°·* katwoman* ·°·.»
(¸.·º(¸.·¨ * *¨·.¸)º·.¸)
(*:\*/:*)
-

 

[modplod]

It's my opinion that after installing xp I would never dream of returning to any other OS. The same as after installing broadband, I'd never revert back to 56k dial up. There just isn't any comparison, xp and broadband are awesome.