Windows XP Home vs. Pro

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Is there any difference to be aware of as far as gaming goes?

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:44:56 GMT, "jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

>Is there any difference to be aware of as far as gaming goes?

Pro handles SMP, which may or may not be a consideration for you,
probably not though.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:44:56 GMT, "jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

>Is there any difference to be aware of as far as gaming goes?
>

The biggest differences are multi-CPU support (SMP) and networking
ability. Pro has more network enabled features, since it is assumed
you will be a member of a domain, etc. For gaming, you should, in
theory, be fine with Home.

Personally, I use Pro on all my systems, but that is just me. I have
Pro at work, and want the same OS wherever I go.


Please replace the "NoSpam" with "MCI" in my email address in order to
reply.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Granto Joe.Granto@NoSpam.Com
Senior Engineer Intel Engineering,MCI

 

[schrodinger]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:Yd%3e.16504$QB6.1062288@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> Is there any difference to be aware of as far as gaming goes?

Not as far as I can tell - I have XPpro installed on 2 machines and home on
one.

I would swear that Pro is more of a resource hog, but I suspect this is just
me being paranoid...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Pro probably has more services running to do with security, networking and
so on.

 

[jk]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

None whatsoever. Pro is built for a corporate environment and allows a
computer to join a domain. It also has numerous utilities that allow IT
professionals to control workstations in a corporate environment. Other
than that they are the same under the hood. Go with Home for gaming.

JK

"jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:Yd%3e.16504$QB6.1062288@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> Is there any difference to be aware of as far as gaming goes?
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"JK" <jkhpub@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:Av6dndqBNJ-ISMzfRVn-pQ@rogers.com...
> None whatsoever. Pro is built for a corporate environment and allows a
> computer to join a domain. It also has numerous utilities that allow IT
> professionals to control workstations in a corporate environment. Other
> than that they are the same under the hood. Go with Home for gaming.

Well actually, if there's no disadvantage other than a small resource hit
and no gaming incompatibilities, I'd rather go with Pro since, as another
poster said, I use it at work. I think I might get frustrated without some
of the administrative tools.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

jeffc wrote:
> "JK" <jkhpub@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:Av6dndqBNJ-ISMzfRVn-pQ@rogers.com...
>> None whatsoever. Pro is built for a corporate environment and
>> allows a computer to join a domain. It also has numerous utilities
>> that allow IT professionals to control workstations in a corporate
>> environment. Other than that they are the same under the hood. Go
>> with Home for gaming.
>
> Well actually, if there's no disadvantage other than a small resource
> hit and no gaming incompatibilities, I'd rather go with Pro since, as
> another poster said, I use it at work. I think I might get
> frustrated without some of the administrative tools.

If you have kids or have a need to set up 'Limited' access user accounts,
that ability only comes with Pro from what I recall.

-craig

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 00:00:37 -0600, "Craig Hulett"
<First.Last@comcast.net> wrote:


>If you have kids or have a need to set up 'Limited' access user accounts,
>that ability only comes with Pro from what I recall.
>
>-craig
>
You can have limited user accounts and guest accounts on Home too. I
think you can set further limitations with Pro though.

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 00:00:37 -0600, "Craig Hulett"
<First.Last@comcast.net> wrote:

>If you have kids or have a need to set up 'Limited' access user accounts,
>that ability only comes with Pro from what I recall.

Home has that, it just hides everything away in its default teletubby
mode.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[jk]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Yeah, it has a policy editor that can be used in a business environment to
ensure that users don't download and install all kinds of stuff that screw
up the corporate standard build. That is one of the biggest headaches for
IT departments. I worked for EDS for a while and you would not believe what
people would do with their work pc's to screw them up.

JK

"Aldwyn Edain" <ae@invalid.email> wrote in message
news:6nn451l4fs4fqribfccbsr7oq759pg31v1@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 00:00:37 -0600, "Craig Hulett"
> <First.Last@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>If you have kids or have a need to set up 'Limited' access user accounts,
>>that ability only comes with Pro from what I recall.
>>
>>-craig
>>
> You can have limited user accounts and guest accounts on Home too. I
> think you can set further limitations with Pro though.