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.

 

[SQLScholar]

There is a few errors thrown up driver wise... but i think all the drivers i need are avaible from compaq website.

Cheers

Dan

 

[wolluf]

Plank,

You might be short of disk space with only 4GB (XP generally takes 1.5GB+, unless you turn off hibernate & system restore & restrict size of paging file)

 

[Viking123]

I've a brand new Sony VAIO laptop (PCG-NV170 for those that care) that came loaded with XP Home (I didn't have the option of choosing Pro, or I would have). It's a 1.6 ghz machine that's running 512 mb ram. I ran great for about 6 weeks. Applications loaded up quickly, internet connections were quick and every thing was responsive.

THEN....POOF! XP Home became the worst hog I've ever seen. I've been around PC's sine IBM introduced their upwardly mobile PS/2 Series (remember them?). It now takes 1 minute to load explorer. 3-5 minutes to bring up IE Explorer. The control panel takes 2-3 minutes. Forget about bringing up Microsoft Word unless you need to go out for coffee.

I've friends that are running 2K and others who are running XP Pro and have experienced little to no problems. XP Home, in my opinion, and I've seen a lot of other testimony on the net about it, has something inheritently build in that causes it to run like molasses in January after the 6-8 week mark.

For the record I loaded up Microsoft's Service Pack 1 (that required leaving my machine on for 12 hours to install) and that made no difference.

Once in an application it seems ok....just getting there requires a LOT of advance planning.

I'm attempting to contact Microsoft (ggod luck to me) and try to get some compensation on moving over to XP Pro...I imagine by the time I get anything from thatm on that issue, the edition of ZP Pro will be on the streets). I agree with everyone's observations that you can't find 2K around. I saw one beat up copy in the last few months. Microsoft is pushing XP down everyone's throats and God forbid you have anything that is below 1 Ghz in power.

I don't want to go through the major effort of erasing everything on my laptop to correct Microsoft's gaffaw in promoting a piece of dung beetle eating material like XP Home Edition just to find XP Pro is no better.

Too bad IBM's O/S2 Warp couldn't get a toe hold in the market. They had a good product back then in comparison to Microsoft at the time. I imagine it'd beat Gate's junk.

For me, XP was more stable than the 98 which gave me blue screens all the time and was flakey. Unfortunately, not every manufacturer supports XP either. I'm sure those of you out there have seen that.

Any recommendations on fixing XP Home?

 

[Hungster]

for any version of xp, i find more disk defrag are needed to keep performance up

 

[llefebure]

Well here we are - 3 months after I started this thread and it just keeps coming back to life every few weeks. I really didn't expect that.

Since I initially posted, I of course have had much more time to play with XP. I really like the system restore utility where you can go back to a certain date. It has resolved several issues. Since I learned of this utility, I have used it to resolve issues on 3 or 4 XP machines. Ironically enough, I've only had 1 situation with 2K Pro where it would have been useful. Seems like it helps negate some of the problems with XP.

I too have noticed XP machines severly slowing down after about 2 months. Note that the system restore doesn't seem to help with this problem. Anyone have a resolution for this?

About a week ago, I was watching a microsoft webcast about whats new in .NET server. The engineer giving the webcast said they are not using the XP GUI in .NET server because it is "fairly resource intensive".

I'm still sticking to what I initially said - I recommed my customers do not use XP - get 2K Pro instead.

-Lance

 

[Hungster]

I been using WinXP Pro since the date it release on my Dell Latitude laptop C810, at first it was buggie, this copy i have was release before you can get it in the store, cuz manufacture tend to get their hands on it first

then for where i work, i start buying license with upgrade advantage so i got XP license then i ordered the media kit for it, man i am telling you, it work extremely good

i don't have problem, remember to defrag your drive more often, for Win2k Pro, you don't as much, but it will boost the performance once you defrag it

tips i did on my systems are
1 go to your "Systems Properties" and "Advanced" tab, click on "Setting" under "Performance", choose "Adjust for best performance"

then i turn all my desktop to classic mode.

try it, i been using it nearly a year now

 

[wolfalh]

I have been using Xp for the last 6 months and find this O/S to be superior to Windows98 or ME, of course I have had very few complications with any O/S I have used in the past. I think problems are user bound, user want to push all products to their limits and than cry, FAULT on the vendors product. This is just an opinion.

 

[Hungster]

Wolfal
i couldn't agree more with you, users are always complaining no matter what ?

i have them setup using for months, no one complains about crashing or blue screen, best part is they never have to reboot.

 

[denzilla]

I like XP but I wish that I would have waited a year to buy it. I'm a little ticked that most of my 98 games don't work or have glitches. Overall I'm happy with the product.

 

[DigitalRolly]

denzilla...

Have you tried compatibility mode?

 

[denzilla]

Windsurfer...

Yea, been through the whole compatibility mode thing. Doesn't help.

 

[petehenneberg]

No BSOD, no stack dumps, no (or very few) drivers to install....

Fast, stable and very friendly. Thats how I find XP Pro. Haven't tried Home Edition. Pete Henneberg

petehenneberg@petehenneberg.com

 

[vgrice]

denzilla...

Are you using comaptability mode or the application compatability tool download from Microsoft? The tool is great and can greatly improve legacy software compatiblity under XP.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/release.asp?ReleaseID=42071&area=search&ordinal=2

Vince Grice
vgrice@hotmail.com
MCSE Win2K, NT; MCSA; MCP+I

I not only use all the brains I have, but all I can borrow.
- Woodrow Wilson

 

[MadJock]

Dunno if anyone else has experienced this but -

I have a laptop (1.1Ghz, 256MB) running XP Pro. All was well untill I converted to NTFS.

The machine boots just as quickly, but after I log in it takes about 7 minutes before the disk activity has stopped enough for the system to be useable. Outlook seems to hate NTFS too!

Strangely enough, I did the same on my desktop (apart from the C partition) and experienced no problems.

Wierd

Graeme website:

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

 

[gpergament]

I like XP Pro and Home; I support 20,000 users that have been on 95 - so XP is a godsend! Also, family users have converted to home or pro, making it easy for me to connect to their machines and fix the problems! (mostly user errors, not bsod or connectivity). Maybe you haven't dug into XP far enough, but with my 300 Mhz, 256M system, it runs fine.

WinME is not a good release - one of the worst since Win3.1. If you still have it, try to backup your data, wipe the disk and install 98; you will be happier!

 

[SaltyDuke]

Hello

i'm of the following opinion:

Windows is for people who like to work on their computer, and are willing to pay thru the nose for the privilige.

Anything else is for people who like to know how their computer works, and are willing to sacrifice a lot of time, learning and effort for the provilige.

(there's a subtle difference there!!)

which one are you?

 

[polymath5]

Subtle yes. But 99.8% of the world falls into your Windows classification.

Just like automobiles. Most people just want to get from one place to another. In reasonable comfort and speed. Others like to tinker and trick out their cars as much as possible. =============
Mens et Manus
=============

 

[SaltyDuke]

good point!!!

 

[Chrisjwalker]

Xp is a blessing in the Networking world of IT, I am one happy administrator now that 90% of my network is on XP. Xp has alot of little things that are not avalible in 2000, like TS. I love how I can just sit down at any box on my netork and log into the DC's or Exchange server.

 

[mikebird]

XP Home Edition looks like something out of Toy Town and acts pretty much the same - it is clumpy, slow and unstable (try installing a SmartCard reader or using Windows Media Player - which I have now ditched). I bitterly regret not paying the extra £20 to have my own, new PC based on the rock-solid (ok, I admit it - also familiar) Win-98!