Should I switch from XP Pro to 2000 Pro?

Sduibek

Distinguished
Sep 3, 2003
14
0
18,510
When I formatted and installed Windows XP Pro after using WinME for a while, i liked it quite a bit. Sure, XP had its problems, but it was much 'better' than ME, overall. But over time, i've been thinking about how XP is basically made for stupid people that love pretty shinyness, and not for people like me, who're into Gaming, tweakage, quality features, stability, and network yummyness. the network comment is aimed at the fact that i've NEVER gotten file sharing to work correctly at a LAN party where everyone had WIndows XP Pro. sure it worked halfway sometimes.. but it never worked flawlessly.

For many reasons i've been thinking of switch to 2000 recently.. but i've got a few specific concerns, so I figured i'd ask the people here.

1) File Sharing - as [-peep-] in 2000 as XP?

2) Compatability - will i have problems running certain games, utilities, etc. that work fine right now (on Windows XP Pro)?

3) Performance - i'd rather not have my computer "not run as well" or slower, etc. from switching to 2000. this would apply to games, boot times, all that good stuff :)

4) Stability - for the most part XP is very stable. how does 2000 compare?

5) Security - things like blaster worm and such aren't a big deal now that i've got a router.. but this is obviously an issue since getting [-peep-] by buffer overruns and such is a pain in the ass. "yay i've been hacked" :p

That's all I can think of at the moment. Thanks ahead of time for telling me your opinions, I could really use some help deciding on this one :/

"How could I be broke? I had 6 million dollars in the bank!"
"Yeah... remember that time when you bought the Six Million Dollar Man?"
"HELL yeah! ... ... Oh."
 

Sduibek

Distinguished
Sep 3, 2003
14
0
18,510
Yeah, I am. But i'm also just tired of having an OS that's not "Lean and Mean" .. which from what i've heard/read is basically what 2000Pro is... XP without all the pretty and stupid [-peep-]. :) Now all I gotta do is find 2000 for cheap, heh. Maybe I can get the Burnt Edition ;)

EDIT: HMm.... although since 2000 Pro IS really cool... maybe it's worth supporting Microsoft on this one.

"How could I be broke? I had 6 million dollars in the bank!"
"Yeah... remember that time when you bought the Six Million Dollar Man?"
"HELL yeah! ... ... Oh."<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Sduibek on 11/20/03 11:19 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

blah

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,694
0
20,780
Win2k Pro is the best thing you can have on PC at this point of time (heck I am still on IE 5.0 that came with it, simply the fastest, lightest and does it all browser (I said it just to point out how good w2k is)), so you have to decide if you want to support MS since it delivered the best (w2k) to you ;)

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
 

Sduibek

Distinguished
Sep 3, 2003
14
0
18,510
have you installed any fixes/patches/service packs and such for IE? i'm a *bit* worried about security and such.. because while updates for MS stuff lots of times have horrible crap (read: CSS with IE6.0), they also do add things for security and all that yummyness. just wondering if i run ie 5.5 or 5.0 if it'll make certain things run slower, or make me open to hacking, whatever. hope to hear from ya :)

"How could I be broke? I had 6 million dollars in the bank!"
"Yeah... remember that time when you bought the Six Million Dollar Man?"
"HELL yeah! ... ... Oh."
 

blah

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,694
0
20,780
SP2 or SP4 would do just fine, never had problems with "hacking" (have ZoneAlarm "ON" all the time). And yehah, IE5 is much more snapier than any IE afta it, especially IE6. Plus, have you ever tried to work with .avi files (Div'x;) and such), XP gets stuck and has no idea what to do with "what the heck that thing is", w2k if it gets stuck on it (it has it's issues az well;) just reloads Explorer in a few secs and you r back to normal (just one point)

Why am I spreading myself here, just install the "trial" version of W2k and see for yerself how much snappier it is than XP. If you like it, you decide if you want to buy one or go back to XP (which is not that bad if you get used to it after couple of years of getting obused by it ;)>

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
 

Sduibek

Distinguished
Sep 3, 2003
14
0
18,510
Alright, i'm gonna get 2k from a friend and then probably end up buying my own copy :)

Thanks for the input guys, I might've figured it out on my own, but hey, that takes effort. ;P

so... Viva La Win2k or something. yes. *out*

"How could I be broke? I had 6 million dollars in the bank!"
"Yeah... remember that time when you bought the Six Million Dollar Man?"
"HELL yeah! ... ... Oh."
 

btvillarin

Distinguished
Apr 10, 2001
2,370
0
19,780
<b>File sharing</b>
To address networking problems with Windows XP, perhaps <A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?showtopic=2502" target="_new">this information</A> can help troubleshoot what problems you might be having.

<b>Gaming compatibility</b>
If you think there might be any issue playing games, I <i>think</i> you're best off staying with Windows XP. <A HREF="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/using/howto/gethelp/appcompat.asp" target="_new">Using Program Compatibility Mode</A>

<b>Performance</b>
<font color=green>i'd rather not have my computer "not run as well" or slower, etc. from switching to 2000. this would apply to games, boot times, all that good stuff</font color=green>

Sorry, I'm not quite sure I understand what you were getting at.

<b>Stability</b>
Like the previous Microsoft Windows releases, you just have to learn how to get it tweaked to work the way you want. If you have Windows XP, I think you should stick with it. If you don't like the look, you can go back to the classic theme, and you can set the Start Menu to the old style if desired as well.

Windows XP is based off Windows NT.

Windows XP = Windows NT 5.1
Windows 2000 = Windows NT 5.0

So, the stability is still there...as long as you set things up correctly.

<b>Security</b>
Windows will almost always have problems in this area, since it's the most popular operating system. The most you can do is ensure safe surfing habits, and to keep your system patched and up-to-date. Keep your antivirus software definitions and scanning engine current, and use a firewall if at all possible.

In my opinion, you might consider an alternative browser other than Internet Explorer, since security holes seem to come up more often. I've been using <A HREF="http://texturizer.net/firebird/" target="_new">Mozilla Firebird</A> for the past month, and I'd feel weird going back to IE full time. It keeps things going quick and simple.

Bryan

<A HREF="http://btvillarin.com/mojo/mojo.cgi?f=list&l=newslttr" target="_new">BTVillarin.com Newsletter</A> - Computing tips and stuff
<A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=329" target="_new">My System</A>
 

BigRat

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
357
0
18,780
for file sharing, win2k is definitely better than XP in a sense that it is bloody hell simpler and straightforward.

performance wise, in my case I noticed that 2k slows down as i use it while XP runs faster. supposed to be some kind of optimization by xp i heard.

both are very stable. rarely had problems with stability in both cases. if any programs crash just reload it. no need to restart as in the [-peeped-] up win95 and 98 and ME

2k looks a bit bland (its a server OS so its expected) but i like the colourful Apple imitation interface of XP more.

:cool: :eek: :redface: :frown: :lol: :mad: :eek: :smile: :tongue: :wink: :evil:
 

harvyk

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2004
29
0
18,530
Disable Simple File Sharing (Under tools \ folder options \ view). My view is the person who designed Simple File Sharing should be shot. it is one of XP's biggest weaknesses. Once you disable SFS you will be able to use Access Control Lists (ACL's) just like in 2K...

Basically XP assumes your an idiot from day one and you have to tell it otherwise...