I have a W2K box and may build a second box. Is there any comelling reason to upgrade to XP Pro for this? I have used W2k Pro for years and it seems to work fine, and I know how to reformat/reinstall it once a year or so. I would network the two boxes, one W2K and one XP Pro if it is worth the trouble and extra $$.
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations SkipVought on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Upgrade from W2K Pro to XP Pro worth it??
- Thread starter Toonah
- Start date
2000pro is a great OS. In my work network environment, I've begun buying XPpro boxes just because at some point the level of support from Microsoft for 2000pro is going to become like the support for Windows 98 is now.
I've also switched to XPpro at home, but to be honest with you the only reason (besides the fact that I just like new toys) is just to get to know it better for work. XPpro, to me at least, is just a more modern interface, coupled with the "dumbing down" of a lot of things for the benefit of less technical users. There are some enhanced security features and things like the remote desktop, but honestly it's nothing that a tech saavy person wouldn't be able to take care of without it.
I dunno, it's fun to play with and there are some cool things in there, but if it came down to buying the OS and some other thing that I really wanted, the OS would come in second.
"I would rather have a free bottle in front of me, than a pre-frontal lobotomy..."
-Shrubble
I've also switched to XPpro at home, but to be honest with you the only reason (besides the fact that I just like new toys) is just to get to know it better for work. XPpro, to me at least, is just a more modern interface, coupled with the "dumbing down" of a lot of things for the benefit of less technical users. There are some enhanced security features and things like the remote desktop, but honestly it's nothing that a tech saavy person wouldn't be able to take care of without it.
I dunno, it's fun to play with and there are some cool things in there, but if it came down to buying the OS and some other thing that I really wanted, the OS would come in second.
"I would rather have a free bottle in front of me, than a pre-frontal lobotomy..."
-Shrubble
I have tested and used both W2K and XP Pro. The only thing I'd add to what shrubble has said is this - RAM. I seem to run W2K fine in 512MB of ram, but XP prefers 1GB of ram to run as smooth. Other than that, I like some of XP's little extras, but prefer W2K's performance, so I'm sticking with W2K for now.
Iolair MacWalter
Iolair MacWalter
- Thread starter
- #4
Thanks for your input! My networking expert just stopped by for some bike parts and he said I could run one box W2K and the other XP Pro with no problems. He agrees that I have so much crap that I do need two networked boxes. Said to run XP on the new box with SATA HDs, etc and 2 gig of RAM. Does this sound good?
SATA and 2 Gb...should be fine. And sure, there is no problem running W2K and XP together on a network. I do. I have three boxes at home, 2 W2K and one XP. The only reason I have XP though, is that it came with it.
If I have any major issues, I will put W2K on it in a flash. I would not put XP back on.
XP is OK, but really, as far as I can tell it is flashier, but functionally not a big improvement over W2K. Properly set up, W2K is solid and does not have, what I at least find, that annoying dumbing down.
Gerry
If I have any major issues, I will put W2K on it in a flash. I would not put XP back on.
XP is OK, but really, as far as I can tell it is flashier, but functionally not a big improvement over W2K. Properly set up, W2K is solid and does not have, what I at least find, that annoying dumbing down.
Gerry
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question