Windows 2000 vs. Windows XP

[Jelsoft]

I'm starting to think about upgrading to a new OS.

Which OS is better? Windows 2000 vs. Windows XP?

Does Windows 2000 have that product activation stuff in it?

Which OS is better suited for games?

[lizardsforall]

XP is Pretty, fast, user friendly and a little more suited for gaming, but 2000 I have found to be indescructible, and has proven it's worth when all other windows have failed (2000 has no activation). If you can put xp on, that's great but I'd at least have 256 ram.

What are your system specs (to give us a better idea of what you should get)?

[N[E]rD]

I am not an expert on OS's. However, I do enjoy Win XP Pro. I have had it for well over a year and I very rarely loose the whole OS, I might loose a program here and there, but even those are rare cases. I don't find it to be that bad on system resources.

On the gaming issue I only ever played one game on the system and that was Warcraft 3. Loved the game, and wasn't bad on my system either. I tried playing the new Halo Beta, but it wouldn't work. But I think that was more of a hardware problem than my OS.

I have a friend with 2000, she loves it. But her computer couldn't handle XP. So she was really forced onto XP.

To be honest, from what I hear around here 2003 server is even better than XP and 2000. It requires the RAM of 2000, the disk space of 2000, and has the stability that XP has (SO I HEAR). But I have been reluctant to try it cause I like my XP so much, do fix what ain't broke ya know?

Hope that is at least useful.

[Malicious Intent]

For ordinary home use, go with Windows XP. Windows 2000 is the NT replacement, much more for networking.

[lizardsforall]

Either way you get the stability of the NTFS file system, That's what you really want (none of that scandisk crap). And you can tweak 2000 to boot to a desktop like XP can.

[Jelsoft]

Originally posted by lizardsforall
XP is Pretty, fast, user friendly and a little more suited for gaming, but 2000 I have found to be indescructible, and has proven it's worth when all other windows have failed (2000 has no activation). If you can put xp on, that's great but I'd at least have 256 ram.

What are your system specs (to give us a better idea of what you should get)?

P4 2.4, 256 MB DDR, 100 GB HDD

[N[E]rD]

I suggest you get some more RAM if you plan to get XP on their...it will get pretty choppy especially with multiple users...i got 384 and its not to to bad. :fire

[lizardsforall]

That machine derserves 512 mb of ram. end of story. you've got a good cpu and harddrive, but you slap in some more ram and your golden. But check to make sure that your ram is either pc2100 or pc2700 ram before you buy (because the wrong one will not work)

Premium 512MB PC2100 DDR 266MHz Memory (http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=358566&Sku=TC1-DDR-512&CatId=839) - PRICE: $89.99

Ram is dirt cheap now, and if i had the money, I'd be stocking up right now, happy modding.

[Jelsoft]

Originally posted by lizardsforall
That machine derserves 512 mb of ram. end of story. you've got a good cpu and harddrive, but you slap in some more ram and your golden. But check to make sure that your ram is either pc2100 or pc2700 ram before you buy (because the wrong one will not work)

Premium 512MB PC2100 DDR 266MHz Memory (http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=358566&Sku=TC1-DDR-512&CatId=839) - PRICE: $89.99

Ram is dirt cheap now, and if i had the money, I'd be stocking up right now, happy modding.

Acutally I have an extra 512 MB of RAM, but it's not in the machine now, because Win9x becomes unstable with it in.

[RACKnRAIL]

I don't play a lot of games, but I've heard that 2000 is better for gaming. I do like XP pro for it's privacy features though. So if you have multible users and lots of memory then XP is the way to go.

[d3ft0n3s]

im my experiance winxp is not nearly as good as 2000pro. it had a FEW problems before, but i just got SP4 and reinstalled the intire compy and its so much beter.

if you want a user experiance akin to AOL then go with XP(not to mentions, incesant compatability problems)

if you want simplistic and stable as a concreit rock, go with 2000.(i havnt restarted in 2 weeks my computer says)

and yea get more memory, its like steroids for your computer but doesnt make its dick smaller.

[lizardsforall]

Originally posted by Jelsoft
Acutally I have an extra 512 MB of RAM, but it's not in the machine now, because Win9x becomes unstable with it in.


It may be the wrong flavor of ram, I'd see whats in there and working, because 98 should support 512 mb, I think.

[Malicious Intent]

I searched the internet for facts on this subject. It appears that there isn't a forum on the internet that hasn't had this discussion. Two facts that I do know for sure and thats no one really knows and no one will ever agree on this subject!
I checked the microsoft website to see if there is a comparison page - like they had between XP Pro and Home, but I have yet to turn a result.

[Winphuk]

I say Win2k hands down. It uses less resources so it's hella fast, and I've hand it running weeks at a time without a reboot it so it's as stable as a rock.

[dacaveman]

my comp hasn't crashed in months.

im using win2k sp4. its very stable

[Kevin06906]

Get windows xp home edition. Better for games.

[MoonMan]

Recently my computer has become a bit more unstable because of all the shit I put on it, but I definitially have to choose 2000. XP doesn't like the taste of my computer and refuses to run on it correctly, so I sort of have a bias opinion anyway.

2003 is very stable from what I have seen of it, probably more so than XP and 2K.

[RJ5500]

Windows server 2003 may have the stability of 2000/XP, but after trying it, I'm not too impressed. Yeah it's fast, but Windows 2000 was fast on my computer too.

It seems to crash when I run slightly out-dated versions of programs. Upgrading would be well and good, but some programs just don't have "2003 compatible" upgraded versions.

As far as longevity, right now people have three choices with windows server 2003.

1. Either use the 180 day trial key that Microsoft gives you

or

2. use a *cough* registered (hacked) volume licence key and be barred from ever using the windows update feature and service packs. Thus being doomed to be full of future security flaws that you cannot patch.

or

3. buy a licence from Micro$oft, for big $.


I've never had much luck with Windows XP on my computers and I just don't like it's user interface and colors.

So, in my opinion, Windows 2000 get's my vote for the rock solid OS that will stand the test of time.
:wings

[Psx]

I run XP with all the visual crap turned off so everything looks "normal." Anyway, the main reason I use it is because of the multi lingual packs for it and also because of this useful little program called "applocale" which lets your run programs in different languages even if your system is not set to it. It is in this way I can run Japanese/Korean/Chinese programs all at once(at least those are main languages for me). Of course it is not perfect but it only works on XP AFAIK

[Omyn]

2003 Server

Anything else is outdated. :]

[Pebbles100]

lol -- it's funny this topic came up...I just switched back to windows 2000 from XP. This computer's only 1 year old, and came with xp. It wasn't as stable as 2000. It drove me nutts at times :)

[Psilaxs]

XP is great if you are comparing it to 98/ME, but it is not as good as Win2K pro, simply because 2k has been around for so long it is bullet proof.

Windows 2000 has NO hardware conflicts, no driver issues (unless you running the most outdated hardware you can imagine, and even at that, most of the time it will have the drivers you need on the cd) Win 2K pro requires less resources, runs games just great, and is more stable the XP pro, it is just a more mature operating system.

Windows 2K pro screamed on my old Pentium 2 400 with 128 megs of ram, very efficient, I cannot place enough praise on Win2K.

[ROMANTICGUY50]

Originally posted by Jelsoft
I'm starting to think about upgrading to a new OS.

Which OS is better? Windows 2000 vs. Windows XP?

Does Windows 2000 have that product activation stuff in it?

Which OS is better suited for games?

My computer came with ME (That sucks big time) I upgraded to XP HOME.SP1 I had some trouble with it at first. With all the updates that came. I have had No problem with XP at all . tried a Windows 2000 and to be honesst I would stick with XP. It is a very good Operating System. That is my opinion,

:devil DOWN WITH THE MPAA AND RIAA- MAY THEY ROT IN HELL:devil

[Psilaxs]

Originally posted by PiRaNeTuS
I had the same machine except that I had XP. XP ran great for me. I guess it all depends on your individual system.

Again, everyone I work with (at the local AFB) HATES Win2k. It crashes ALL of the time. Tried running it with no service packs, and with SP1 through 4. Still crashes. On mutiple computers manufactured by different companies. They don't want XP cause they're scared of the prettiness of it, but hopefully they'll get 2003 soon. I'm one that is always updating software, installing, uninstalling, rebooting, lots of things. And nothing I've seen is as stable as 2003. XP was very stable for me as well. I ran my computer for about a month and half with XP with no crashes or reboots. Was going to keep it around for a while longer till my good pal Psilaxs convinced me to go with 2003.

As for my experience: I loved 2003 and XP cause when I plug something in, no matter what it is, they would detect it and intall it correctly. 2000 rarely ever did so. At my job, on the typical day, I'll have Photoshop, AutoCAD, Premiere, Flash, Dreamweaver, and After Effects open all at the same time, working on different projects. 2000 would crash all the time. The same test done with XP and 2003? Smooth and Flawless. My vote goes to either of these two. Great OS's.

I agree, WinXP Pro is GREAT, no doubt about it, but just my personal experience with it hasn't been as good as others.

For me, 2k seems better able to handle flakey hardware, like my shit motherboard LOL.

When you hook a Digital camera up to XP, it recognizes it as a seperate drive, and you can grab the pictures from it direct, completely bypassing the bloated 3rd party software.

*EDIT* Just to clarify, I ran XP Pro on my old 233 with 64 megs of ram, and it ran great when i turned all the eye candy off (I hate the candy ass default look of XP)

[matt merch]

Originally posted by Psilaxs
I agree, WinXP Pro is GREAT, *EDIT* Just to clarify, I ran XP Pro on my old 233 with 64 megs of ram, and it ran great when i turned all the eye candy off (I hate the candy ass default look of XP)

exactly it cracks me up when ppl say i could never run xp cos of the kiddy graphic interface when u just select the classic scheme :)

ps i run xp pro sp1 2600 build at home
win2k on dell at work
both are stable
with ur hardware i would go for xp or 2003
but at the end of the day thats just my opinion :wings :mellow

[slartibartfast]

So you kids are still fighting about which windoze version that sucks the least...

The big Q is probably what you intend to use the box for. As most problems with instability, crashes etc are due to the amount of (poor) software that you load onto it, that's where your main concern should be. And one should probably not forget about the amount of crappy drivers that exists to further add to the problems with M$ OS's. Makes me wonder why M$ created a system with a kernel which allows 3rd party software to bring down the whole system though...
Anyway, have a look around for issues with the same hardware and software that you intend to use, as that might shed some light on the path you should follow.

As for me, my heart belongs to another - *nix... Though I use to w2k whenever necessary.

[Krypt0]

I would say... Longhorn Professional

haha.. I would recommend 2k. Win XP has its own advantages, but the stability of 2k cannot be beat (yet). Both 2k and XP Pro cost the same amount (last I checked) so if you are going to buy it, go get windows 2000 professional. If you are NOT going to buy it... go get win2k anyways. lol :hole

i personally use XP Pro 2600 sp1, Win 2k Pro SP4, and various other os. I like 2k better, but use xp pro more often

[kiwibank]

Originally posted by d3ft0n3s
im my experiance winxp is not nearly as good as 2000pro. it had a FEW problems before, but i just got SP4 and reinstalled the intire compy and its so much beter.

if you want a user experiance akin to AOL then go with XP(not to mentions, incesant compatability problems)

if you want simplistic and stable as a concreit rock, go with 2000.(i havnt restarted in 2 weeks my computer says)

and yea get more memory, its like steroids for your computer but doesnt make its dick smaller.

windows 2000 pro with service pack 4, hotfixes etc does seem to be more stable and consume less resources than xp home edition. xp professional seems more stable than xp home edition as well. certainly windows systems deep throat memory and resources faster than linda lovelace.

nice comparison on memory and dick shrinkage.

kiwibank

[simon_says_horrible]

They're both the best OS so far but if you want the fastest and simple interface with few error messages or no hardware problems, choose Windows 2000. For OpenGL games (like Medal of Honor: AA) or a new PC, XP is the best choice.

NOTE:
-Windows Media 9 Series is the best media player for Win2000.
-Win2000 are the most popular in different country (XP in the US).
-Manual update must choose (instead of automatic) for XP to prevent "Send Error" messages (from Digital Camera softwares, etc) or system problems.
-There's no need to update for Win2000 unless your software requires it.


Windows 2000 vs. XP - Articles
http://www.jmu.edu/computing/newsletter/cc/jan02/windows2000-XP.shtml
http://www.computeruser.com/articles/2105,5,17,1,0501,02.html
http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win2000/n1031340246

OTHER FORUM
http://forums.devshed.com/t28328/s.html
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread/t-65667.html
http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/showthread/t-60204.html
http://www.devhood.com/messages/message_view-2.aspx?thread_id=37364

[Kyle06]

I don't know about games but it is the best one that I have tried cause it is the most user friendly and it is easyer to find files that are missing and what not..

[g-smooth2k]

Win 2000 is a good choice for games and compatability issues with hardware
Games for Win 2000
Unreal Tournament 2003
Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos
Splinter Cell
Raven Shield
Midnight Club II
Return to Castle Wolfenstein
etc.

Win XP Pro is good but not as solid as win 2000
Win 2003 not sure but I think it probably is the best Microsoft has to offer

[Theinfamousone]

I am pretty sure XP is atleast as stable as 2K. I've had it running for weeks too (or is it months), and haven't had problems. If you want to clear it up, you can easily end process of "explorer" and then go to run under the ctrl+alt+del menu and run "explorer", you don't have to restart.

It is also compatible with probably anything you've got in your system by now, it's been out for 2 years.

I want to try Server 2003, anyone else know what's up?

[FreeMuzik4Lyfe]

Ahhh. Im still using Windows 98, so i dont know what you're talking about lmao

[The Gauge]

Like all choices, you'll need to pick the OS that's best suited to your needs.

If you like things simple, don't mind the OS making most decisions for you and have plenty of memory (256MB+), there's certainly nothing wrong with XP.

However, if you want a slicker installation, much faster operation and more accessibility to advanced configuration options then Windows 2000 is the Daddy.

You might be interested in looking at a program called 2000/XP Lite from www.litepc.com. This superb program will let you rip out all the components of both OSs that Microsoft don't normally let you touch. And I'm not talking about removing the shortcuts, this really does delete everything. I did a clean install of XP the other day, removed everything I didn't need and my TOTAL installation size was 519MB (which is the smallest I've ever seen XP).

However, I have to say, once I'd stripped out of XP all the crap that I just don't want or don't need, I was more or less left with Windows 2000 at the end of it. I'm now seriously considering moving back to 2000...

Just remember this: Windows XP is Windows 2000 with extra bells and whistles added to make it more "consumer friendly". If you know what you're doing with your OS then you may well be better off sticking with 2000.

[Roine]

[QUOTE=simon_says_horrible]They're both the best OS so far but if you want the fastest and simple interface with few error messages or no hardware problems, choose Windows 2000. For OpenGL games (like Medal of Honor: AA) or a new PC, XP is the best choice.

NOTE:
-Windows Media 9 Series is the best media player for Win2000.What? 6.4 is,also ever heard of Winamp??
-Win2000 are the most popular in different country (XP in the US).
-Manual update must choose (instead of automatic) for XP to prevent "Send Error" messages (from Digital Camera softwares, etc) or system problems.
-There's no need to update for Win2000 unless your software requires it.
Yeah if you want your system with a bunch of security holes in it!

[Psilaxs]

Just remember this: Windows XP is Windows 2000 with extra bells and whistles added to make it more "consumer friendly". If you know what you're doing with your OS then you may well be better off sticking with 2000.

Out of all the pages of text and paragraphs written in this thread so far, that statement summarizes it the best.

[nasrules]

rD']I suggest you get some more RAM if you plan to get XP on their...it will get pretty choppy especially with multiple users...i got 384 and its not to to bad. :fire

I run 384mb of SDRAM with XP, and it's great. Don't forget that the 256 is DDR.

[Ken17625]

The only advantage I can see that XP has over 2000 is a larger collection of drivers, though this is because, as Psilaxs said, it has been around longer, meaning it is an older OS than XP.

The visuals, bells and whistles, and what not are more or less subjective to a users taste.

[zllac]

ok i didn't read any of the above posts
but i say w2k sp2 3in1 corperate with 2000lite and msconfig.exe from XP and xteq

and i recomend using spywareblaster adaware pro and spybot and a good firewall like @guard and a good virus protection like pc-cillin

the reason i dont go above sp2 is becuase of DRM in sp3 and above. and the reason i pick 3in1 corperate is becuse it has no serial number

these are the setups i do on about 50 computers i manage and they are solid

...oh ya and also i recomend you turn off all the system services you dont need this also helps

[billafu]

I run both in a multi-boot arrangement and they are both very good so far. I do seem to have fewer problems with 2k pro. XP pro seems to have a problem with the television channel display (Guide+) that came with my video card (a Radeon 9700 Pro AIW) that 2k has no problem with. Other than that, and after turning off most of the added features in XP, they seem pretty similar. If you are able to do so, install both and do your own comparison.