DodgeIntrepid.Net Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am in need of a document that compares the suttle differences between the captioned systems on the workstation.
I know certain differences, but need a documented comparison for management justification.
Anybody !!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,980 Posts
Try going to Microsoft's website. They have a downloadable document that specifies a technical overview of XP in relation to prior systems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Windows XP Pro is the best!!!!!!! The best of both worlds come together (Office & Home use!) AND I love XP!!!!!!! But it isn't as fast as my R/T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,739 Posts
I have found XP pro to be significantly faster than win2k pro... either as stand alone or on a network.

I don't think ill be running too much win2k pro in the future. Now if Checkpoint would get a WORKING secure remote client for XP i would be a happy camper. :D :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
229 Posts
Originally posted by mohamed arif:
I am in need of a document that compares the suttle differences between the captioned systems on the workstation.
I know certain differences, but need a documented comparison for management justification.
Anybody !!!
Boink!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
Dear lord. WinXP. The "WinME" of the NT line.

I'll stick with nice Win2K myself. Win2K had the most bug-free rollout of any MS product. WinXP, didn't that have a bunch of immediate critical updates the first day it was released?

And the hardware activation stuff? Are you kidding me? Yuck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,099 Posts
Originally posted by Black Monk:
Dear lord. WinXP. The "WinME" of the NT line.
I think this is far from the truth. Sure it has a significant different look (eye candy). But I don't think ME and XP can even be compared!!! XP is faster than 2K (in my experience), and just as reliable (if not more).

Just my opinion though...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
587 Posts
I love XP too! Very fast, much more reliable than 98, great graphics, great features, great layout. Then again, it IS a Microsoft product, so something is bound to be wrong with it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
Originally posted by Djnrg:
I love XP too! Very fast, much more reliable than 98, great graphics, great features, great layout. Then again, it IS a Microsoft product, so something is bound to be wrong with it...
You could say that again...XP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,278 Posts
but the security patch was easy to either perform manually or download the very small patch..much better than the HUGE download of win2K SP1+2

I have a machine that I changed from win2K to XP, the speed is greater and its running stable as can be, so far I think XP Pro is worth the money
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,739 Posts
XP smokes 2000 when it comes to speed. Even on the ****ed up network at my job... XP runs WAY faster than 2000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
The only real downside is the EULA for XP. By accepting it, you give Microsoft pretty much the right to do anything with your machine that they want to do.

My next door neighbor works at a college, and part of their curriculum is providing course-specific software to their students. He has told me that they've told their students to avoid installing XP on their machines, because XP has disabled students' machines when it did an "internal software audit" (or actions to that effect).

Personally, while XP may be faster than W2K, may have more bug fixes (who really expects XP to never have a multi-megabyte download patch -- I've got a nice piece of swampland in Florida you've got to see), and may support hardware better than W2K, I find it hard to install software on my computer that regularly audits my hardware and software, and will prevent me from using my machine (without a phone call to M$ to "ask permission again") simply because I upgraded too many things at one time.

XP can go rot in hell for all I care. It may be cool, and it may be "better" (depending upon whose definition of "better" you use -- Micro$oft's or you own), but when W2K does the job for far less hassles, I'm not going to "upgrade" simply to put more money in M$ pockets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
502 Posts
I've got a copy of XP Corporate, but I don't really ever intend on using it. I've been running W2k Pro for the last year, and with SP2 and everything else I've been using, it's been very reliable.

In my view, XP is just the same as W2k with some added frills and **** I don't need to upgrade for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
562 Posts
I am staying away from XP. I don't feel like having Bill Gates look over my shoulder :)
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top