xp or 2000?

Author
Discussion

mikeylad

31,608 posts

254 months

Thursday 14th August 2003
quotequote all
My 2000 is rubbish. crashes about once a day.

if frustration was legal tender, i could easily afford XP...

smeagol

1,947 posts

285 months

Thursday 14th August 2003
quotequote all
My experience of XP is that its fine on computers designed to run it. Sh*te on ones that aren't. I would upgrade to 2000 the memory management is the same I believe which was the only disadvantage of 98SE. I still use 98SE on my main machine with no problems (655MB RAM all used on regular ocasions). The only thing you have to do with 98SE is shut down at night or if you have been pushing hard a quick restart.

I have seen XP home be totally useless and effectively give up on a perfectly okay hard disk twice which required a complete reformat and start. Also hardware which was supposedly XP compatible crash systems. It has no configurablility and IMHO is cr@p.

XP pro is much better but still full of bugs/loopholes as the latest "blaster" has illustrated. The firewall is worse than useless, it pretends it works but in fact doesn't. I have on several occasions seen stuff come through the firewall and then block perfectly legit stuff.

I am waiting for XP second edition to come out (ie the next operating system, they may not call it Second edition but it almost certainly will be that) but as I originally said if your computer is a couple of years old or more then think very carefully before installing XP it may run badly IMHO.

agent006

12,040 posts

265 months

Friday 15th August 2003
quotequote all
2000

They've not found all the holes in NT4 yet, so there's no wat XP is safe.

Podie

46,630 posts

276 months

Friday 15th August 2003
quotequote all
agent006 said:
They've not found all the holes in NT4 yet, so there's no wat XP is safe.


MS support for NT4 is ceasing - if it hasn't done so already.

smeagol said:

It has no configurablility and IMHO is cr@p.


Rubbish. As with all GUI systems, the configurability lies within the command prompt and the use of scrpts. We can totally disable / remove features via a login scrpt to stop people personalising (screwing their) machines.

smeagol said:

XP pro is much better but still full of bugs/loopholes as the latest "blaster" has illustrated. The firewall is worse than useless, it pretends it works but in fact doesn't. I have on several occasions seen stuff come through the firewall and then block perfectly legit stuff.


The XP firewall is a token effort... as with all these things standalone products are better. The firewall is aimed at the home user on dial-up.

The blaster worm was not just restricted to XP. I seem to recall it affected 2000, ME and NT4. In fact virtually every recent MS OS has had some kind of vulnerability in it. Try www.bigfix.com

davidd

6,452 posts

285 months

Friday 15th August 2003
quotequote all
W2K on your servers (or 2003 if being a TVR driver you are used to doing QA for companies) XP pro on the desktop.

We are running XP on all sorts of stuff and without exception it is faster and more reliable than 2K 98SE and don't start on ME

CarZee, stop being a luddite, embrace the tellytubbies. Bloody hell you'll be telling me Linux is a proper operating system next (grabs anorak and runs ).

D.

Podie

46,630 posts

276 months

Friday 15th August 2003
quotequote all
davidd said:
W2K on your servers (or 2003 if being a TVR driver you are used to doing QA for companies) XP pro on the desktop.

We are running XP on all sorts of stuff and without exception it is faster and more reliable than 2K 98SE and don't start on ME

CarZee, stop being a luddite, embrace the tellytubbies. Bloody hell you'll be telling me Linux is a proper operating system next (grabs anorak and runs ).

D.


ROTFLMAO... ade my day that!

5ltr-chim

635 posts

258 months

Friday 15th August 2003
quotequote all
3 months - mere flash in the pan stuff - My unix systems only get rebooted when the electricity board fails to supply !!

Go unix/linux !!