Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 20

Thread: Win2k Pro or WinXP Pro

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    In me bedroom..
    Posts
    405
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Win2k Pro or WinXP Pro

    I have a legit copy of each of these, and have been using win2k pro for the last 4 months, but i got told winxp pro is alot better such as faster and more things etc.
    I would just like to know in your views is it worth changing to.

    I play games alot, listen to music and like to watch films etc and wondering if its the right choice, also i can skin it in which you cant really do with win2k and it looks plain like win98.

    Thanks.
    Last edited by Stylez; 24-07-2003 at 02:34 PM.

  2. #2
    TiG
    TiG is offline
    Walk a mile in other peoples shoes...
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Questioning it all
    Posts
    6,213
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked
    48 times in 43 posts
    well personally i don't rate XP, i really don't like it. Both my systems at home at 2k pro and they are stable as anything and mighty quick. i personally hate Xp's rounded edges and if you use XP in win2k look mode you might as well use win2k imo.

    All my games work fine on 2k.

    I think it goes down to personal preference, if you like messing with your system and pretty colours go XP.

    TiG

  3. #3
    daft ideas inc. scottyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Charming and Exotic Bracknell
    Posts
    1,576
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    3 times in 3 posts
    I prefer xp pro, but it has serious issues if you're doing any development with it -
    I've had to blow my copies away and start from fresh about 6 times now, due to .net corruption (incredibly frustrating!) where 2k doesn't have those problems.

    But at the same time, 2k has inherent problems which you can't really do anything about.
    I've just gotten a support advisory from discreet telling me that 3DS Max is only supported on Win2k SP2 - which is useless to find that out now.

    What I'm saying is that there are always going to be software incompatabilities, and you have to work out for yourself which ones you can live with!

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    In me bedroom..
    Posts
    405
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Thanks for your answers, i have a few probs in win2k, and just wanted to try something different. Im going to try winxp pro and see how it goes and if i dont agree with it then straight back to win2k. Have got 6 weeks of now from college, so i got time to try some things and also have everything backed up so if i install winxp pro and like it then ill stay with it, if not ill go back to win2k.

    Once again thanks for your answers, their very much appreciated.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Nemeliza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,719
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    5 times in 5 posts
    2k Pro rules!
    Im not so keen on XP pro. im not saying its rubbish i just prefer to use 2k over XP.

  6. #6
    Oh no!I've re-dorkalated! Jiff Lemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sunny MK
    Posts
    2,504
    Thanks
    80
    Thanked
    44 times in 41 posts
    I'm using both at the moment.

    Win 2k has been perfect, however I'm also aware of inevitability - it too will go the way of 95/98/nt, hence why I'm also using XP.

    XP has some very nice features but also some INCREDIBLY frustrating ones. Why on earth does it insist on searching "the internet" for suitable network locations I may wish to add when (a) I'm not even connected to the net and (b) wouldn't trust a damn thing it finds. It wouldn't be half as bad if it ever realised this, but EVER single time? Ended up mapping network drives as it's quicker.

    If its stability you seek, I still lean to 2k. By all means try XP, just make sure you a ghost image your 2k install you can fall back on!

  7. #7
    Goat Boy
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Alexandra Park, London
    Posts
    2,428
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Although I prefer the look and feel of XP, 2k is more stable. I've had to reinstall about 3 times now, but I cant live without the skinning features of XP, or the smoothed fonts on my laptop...
    "All our beliefs are being challenged now, and rightfully so, they're stupid." - Bill Hicks

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Nr. Bath
    Posts
    201
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Ive just installed XP pro on a small server it had to act as a gateway to the internet for two windows me clients. One tick of a box and away it went no problem.

    However personally I wont be switching form 2k pro to XP pro, I cant see the point at the moment I'm happy with 2k. I also here that XP is memory hungry, but ive yet to see this...

    rough_neck

  9. #9
    Will work for beer... nichomach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Preston, Lancs
    Posts
    6,137
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked
    138 times in 99 posts
    • nichomach's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-870A-UD3
      • CPU:
      • AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 95W
      • Memory:
      • 16GB DR3
      • Storage:
      • 1x250GB Maxtor SATAII, 1x 400GB Hitachi SATAII
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Zotac GTX 1060 3GB
      • PSU:
      • Coolermaster 500W
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster Elite 430
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 20" TFT
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media Cable
    At home I use 2K, at work XP Pro. I found that XP felt more responsive than 2K on my dual Athlon work machine, but 2K goes faster at home on the single CPU box.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    123
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    2k networking seems really lame especially with dns. and also 2k kept freezng up on my pc and XP didnt so xp all the way for me now

  11. #11
    Furry Shorty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    1,237
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    2 times in 2 posts
    This is the kind of thread that never quites gives you a straight answer

    It's best to try both and see which one YOU prefer. I prefer XP...

    Better dual monitor support (2K dual monitor is really patchy).
    Once you strip away all the XP eyecandy, it is faster to my eyes than 2k.
    I simply prefer the feel and usage of the OS over 2k.

    Some love XP, some love 2K. It's horse for courses try em both and see which you prefer
    "In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates?"

  12. #12
    O\/\/N3D
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    372
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    XP for me , you can make look just like 2k too if ya dont want the whole telly tubby thing

  13. #13
    Senior Member joshwa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sheffield, UK
    Posts
    4,832
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked
    66 times in 61 posts
    • joshwa's system
      • Motherboard:
      • PC Chips M577 AT/ATX
      • CPU:
      • AMD K6-2 500Mhz
      • Memory:
      • 128mb PC100 SDRAM
      • Storage:
      • 8GB Fujitsu
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 3dfx Voodoo 3 3000 AGP (16mb)
      • PSU:
      • ATX 500watt
      • Case:
      • Midi Tower AT
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 98 SE
      • Monitor(s):
      • 22" TFT Widescreen
    I much prefer 2000 Pro, but if I had to buy one for a new system, I would have to buy XP Home, as it's cheaper than Win2k Pro.

    I had some problems with XP (but it was a release candidate - legit from MS for £10) and on my system at the time it seemed a bit sluggish...

    I think XP is best on systems with more than 256mb ram, whereas Win2k pro works okay on 128mb systems, and is fine and dandy on systems with 192/256mb ram. (my system is currently using 182mb ram with w2k pro)

    We could do a poll ? yep, please vote here to help this chap
    http://forums.hexus.net/showthread.php?threadid=305
    Last edited by joshwa; 24-07-2003 at 07:40 PM.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holsworthy, Devon
    Posts
    513
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked
    11 times in 11 posts
    • Ben Rogers's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8P67 B3
      • CPU:
      • Intel core i5 2500k @ 4400MHz
      • Memory:
      • 12GB DDR3 (8GB Corsair Vengeance 1600MHz)
      • Storage:
      • 60GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD (boot) + 1TB Samsung F3 + 500GB Samsung F1 SATA II
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI HD7870 2GB
      • PSU:
      • 650W Coolermaster VX
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster Centurion 5 II
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 64 bit SP1
      • Monitor(s):
      • 19" Samsung SyncMaste
      • Internet:
      • 23Mbit / 1.1 Mbit ADSL2
    both are great imo, although 2k requires the hardware to be perfect else you'll get bsod's and crashes, xp doesn't require the hardware to be so perfect, if ram is a bit dodgy you may get by with xp but not with 2k, that's why i like xp over 2k for overclocking.

    on the same hardware i've found them both to be totally rock solid stable os's, no problems at all so i guess it comes down to weather you like all the eye candy and resources taken up by xp or like the the classic feel of 2k without all the bits some don't use/need.

    if you're running a system with a cpu slower than say a p3 700 with less than 128/192meg of ram go with 2k, as this will run far smoother than xp.
    E6850@ 3700MHz / 6GB DDR2 / 500GB SATAII / nVidia 7800 GTX / Lian Li Plus7B

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    In me bedroom..
    Posts
    405
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Should be fine for me mate, im going to try winxp pro and if i dont like it will switch back.

    Athlon XP 2100+ (1.74ghz)
    Gigabyte 7VAX Mobo
    512 PC2700 DDR Ram
    60 gig hd..

    So will run it easily, ive had experiences with xp home and thought it was pretty good and win2k seems fine just wanna try something else, so im trying winxp pro and if i dont like it straight bck to win2k pro.

  16. #16
    Theoretical Element Spud1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    North West
    Posts
    7,212
    Thanks
    280
    Thanked
    279 times in 222 posts
    • Spud1's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Mac Pro
      • CPU:
      • 2x 2.8ghz Quad Core Xeons (octo-core)
      • Memory:
      • 4gb DDR2 FB-Dimm
      • Storage:
      • 1x1TB, 1x320gb, 2x500gb, 1x250gb, 120GB SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia Geforce 560Ti
      • PSU:
      • Mac pro PSU
      • Case:
      • Mac Pro Case
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 8
      • Monitor(s):
      • 1x22" LG 3D TFT 1x 19" ViewSonic
      • Internet:
      • 80mb BT Infinity
    XP pro all the way. its like 2K pro but better. in my experiance its more compatable, more stable, easier to configure, faster, and umm just better tbh, but as Shorty said its mainly down to personal pref

    however the newer OS's are normally better than the old in my opinion - compare it to NT4 and 2k - which would you run both stable when the service packs are applied, both very similar in many ways, but 2k is just..better somehow, its the same with XP

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •