Personal computing discussed

Moderators: renee, Flying Fox, Ryu Connor

 
gubbar924
Gerbil Team Leader
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 7:00 pm

my $0.02

Sat May 04, 2002 4:28 am

ok get this, I've ran windows 95, 98 se, ME, 2000 pro with SP-2, AND XP pro on the same machine (all separately, never dual booted them), and I'll admit, I actually do like XP pro the best. I dont really care much for whats on my computer, just the stuff I mainly want and use. Windows 95, 98, and ME were all a little buggy but did get progressively better, and far as 2k's stability, it was solid but the interfacing could use a little revamping, and as far as xp pro goes, since it is supposedly just the next version of win2k, you technically DO have win2k installed with a few clean-ups here and there, but on the downside, they added more unnecessary stuff to it too, but that can be easily fixed though, there's always a way to uninstall certain softwares. Also, I dont remember seeing the compatibility mode thing in win2k. Its really helpful for backward moding. I found a few things from back in the days that I could even think about running in win 2k, but with xp just set the compatibility and it was done just like that. The only 1 thing that i did NOT like about 2k was that for some reason it was REALLY slowing down my old ass computer! Given that my computer sucks and its ancient, I just wonder why I havent had any problems with any of the other OS's like that. On a final note, if you decide to clean install XP pro, make sure you have atleast 4 gigs space for it. I've got my system files on a totally separate partition, I havent installed too much on my computer yet either, and I'd like to think that I keep my drives fairly clean, with all that said and done, the system files have taken up just under 2 gigs of space so far, thats including all the updates/patches/fixes for win xp pro.

Well I told you I'd give my 2 cents and instead I gave you the whole damn dollar, so I'll shutup now, hope my blabbering was useful to anybody out there.
 
Austin
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Posts: 3662
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2002 8:04 am
Location: Birmingham ENGLAND (some say Mars, or was it Uranus)

Mon May 06, 2002 7:37 pm

:wink: I'd agree with Hunter Viking. There's more to XP than pack upgrades and eye candy.

:D It is much more compatible and finally brings all of the Win9x ability & simplicty to the reliable trusty NT core.

8) Oldfart (nice name :wink: ). If anything I'd say Win2000 was the 'rushed' OS as M$ had loads of probs merging Win9x & NT. WinXP is what Win2000 was meant to be and M$ ended up having to $hit, sorry $hip out WinME as it had been 12 months since the previous 'new' OS. You know M$, money, money, money. :wink:

:evil: M$ will prob pull support for Win2000 inside 2 years (max) and is there much price diff anyway between Xp & 2000?
I'm doing my best to catch up but life's still just too busy.
 
pissedoffwookie
Gerbil
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2002 9:15 pm

Wed Jul 03, 2002 7:01 pm

the compatability fature is available in Win2k SP2

to access it you have to right click on a shortcut to the app you need to fix and ther is a new compatability tab installed by SP2

also there is the appcompat util you can install from the CD in order to help installation

With that said you'd think i'd be in the Win2K camp...well I'm not

Dont get me wrong I love Win2K

but XP is basically Win2K SP3

but the most compelling reason to go XP is since your willing to pay the extra $100 for Win2K get XP pro and turn on remote desktop and create an account for yourself on your Mothers machine that way you can fix it when ever she calls ya
PissedOffWookie

P4 2533Mhz
512MB RAM
Geforce II PRO
80 GB WD SE HD

HP Ipaq 3835
128MB SD flash memory
802.11b

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests
GZIP: On