Jump to content


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.

Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.


XP vs 2000

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Gothmog


  • Members
  • 172 posts
  • Local time:05:53 AM

Posted 29 September 2005 - 12:24 PM

HI i want to reformat and reinstall my OS on my comp, but i have a slight problem I want you to help me with. I need to decide whether to go with my 2000 pro disk (which is not actually installed on another machine so im not even gonna break a license agreement!) or my XP home which is what is on it right now. I have used both, XP moreso b/c that's what i got when i bought it in Jan 03.

I want to know if there are any pros or cons to going back to 2000 b/c at the moment I cannot find my XP disk (stupid me lost the OS disk) otherwise i'll hold out and look harder amoungst my quaint mess of computer junk.

BTW my main reason for doing a complete reinstall is b/c XP is giving me some pain in the ass problems, such as when I shut down i have to force quit some dll file(the name escapes me atm and im not at my home comp) which im pretty sure is standard and important b/c it is "not responding." I didnt know a dll could respond until this one stopped doing it and made me close it out before the system shutdown or restarted. but enough of my whining...

My system basics are:
P4 2.8 (but the sytem properties only have it at a 2.1/2.2 is this a multiplier problem?)
about 640 MB of RAM (its an odd number cuz i cannabalized a stick off of another system of mine that got fried/zapped and came up DOA)
ATI Radeon 9000
and i cant think of what else would be important for an OS install

PS i am HEAVY into gaming is 2000 gonna limit some of the games i can play/ limit performance? i just thought of this, i thought i heard something along those lines

thanx for ur help and bearing with my wandering rambling post/thoughts

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)


#2 Kaptain


  • Members
  • 48 posts
  • Local time:04:53 AM

Posted 29 September 2005 - 04:08 PM

I switched to XP Professional from 2000 Pro about a year ago and the thing i hate in XP is that it's less stable than 2000 (at least in my case)
BTW I'll ask ya'll if you'r experiencing the same problem.

My Win2k was more stable than XPpro. 2k almost never froze one me, but XP does freeze sometimes. When 2k froze, i could press CTRL-ALT-DEL, and no matter what!.. it brought up the Task Manager in half a second and i had total control of the situation in a snap. It isn't the case with XPpro, if it freezes.. i hit CTRL-ALT-DEL.. and nothing, it simply ignores me and maybe after 3 min if i get lucky Task Manager Pops up.

In conclusion, i believe that Windows 2000 is more stable than Windows XP pro. What ya'll think and did you experienced same problem with applying "CTRL-ALT-DEL"?

Athlon 2600 512kb
1GB Corsair 4200
GeForce 5200
80GB Western Dig.
All from Newegg, they rule! :thumbsup:

And i doubt that Windows2k will limit your gaming performance. I've played many games when i had Win2k such as a lot of CS and mods, MaxPain2, Call of duty, HL2, Ghost Recon... and many older games. I never experienced any problems with 2000. If my hard-drive will fail, i'll switch back to 2k for sure. My only concern is that Microsoft will end support and releasing new updates for 2k anyday! :flowers:

Edited by Kaptain, 29 September 2005 - 04:14 PM.

#3 Gothmog

  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 172 posts
  • Local time:05:53 AM

Posted 03 October 2005 - 10:13 PM

I switched to XP Professional from 2000 Pro about a year ago and the thing i hate in XP is that it's less stable than 2000 (at least in my case)
BTW I'll ask ya'll if you'r experiencing the same problem.

With XP (i only have home) i try to make a habit of having the task manager running in the tray to give myself a better chance of calling it up. Not really sure if this actually make it better, but works for me. As for its general stability XP is a dream cuz when 98 used to crash it either locked up and you had to restart or use the blue screen options (ahh the memories!) Now with XP when it crashes it just kinda closes and reloads explorer and you just lose the tray icons.

Also I am curious about the differences between the Home and Pro packages. Anybody know the benefits of upgrading to Pro over Home?Am I missing out on some great features that i might actually use/need? Everywhere you buy computers now it seems that they tout XP Pro as the best to go with even though they package home to keep the price low. Would it be worth picking up a copy of XP Pro before I reinstall to use these extra super special features MS wants another 100 - 200 dollars for?

My only concern is that Microsoft will end support and releasing new updates for 2k anyday!

I doubt that they will stop support for W2k. At least until they make it right, which will never happen. I had an old PIII with 98SE on my home lan and that thing seemed to be getting stuff from windows update twice a week or more.

#4 acklan


    Bleepin' cat's meow

  • Members
  • 8,529 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Baton Rouge, La.
  • Local time:03:53 AM

Posted 04 October 2005 - 01:33 AM

I run Win2k on 9 computes at the house. I upgrade them from '98 and ME and am glad I did. I run XP Pro on the computer I use daily but would have moved to Win2k if I could have purchased a copy cheaper at the time. I find Win2k is XP Lite (My option only). I have two ME machines I will switch over in the next month or so.
It has the '98 interface with some of the features of XP. It is without question far more stable than '98 or ME (Again my option only).
If you want to upgrade and only have $60 or so it's the best choice. The learning curve from '98 to Win2k is small.
One piece of advise..write down the admin password :thumbsup: . Unlike '98 you can't bypass the startup. Unless you use the autosign on feature.
"2007 & 2008 Windows Shell/User Award"

#5 franktiii


  • Members
  • 309 posts
  • Local time:04:53 AM

Posted 04 October 2005 - 10:56 AM

I have just moved the last of the computers on the network at work to Win XP from Win 2000. XP has the security and stability of 2000 with the warm and fuzzies of 98. More importantly, Microsoft is phasing out support of Win 2000 and Win 98.

One of the computers on the network is a Celeron 366 processor, 10 gig hard drive, 256 meg of ram running XP Pro, it only runs one program at a time, but it runs Access, Excel, Outlook, Word or Firefox like a champ. One at a time is fine, it can handle two programs, but starts to slow down. It is used by volunteers in our library, not for regular staff.

There are two main differences between XP Pro and Home. If you want a domain type network with a server, you must have Pro. Also you need XP Pro to remote administer another computer. The computer being controlled does not have to have XP Pro, but the controlling computer does.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users