|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
07-15-2002, 12:16 PM
|
#1 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,372
|
XP Pro or 2000 Pro? Stability, security, efficiency.
Which operating system is better for Tusl2-c running a Celeron 1.4? Why?
|
|
|
|
07-15-2002, 12:48 PM
|
#2 |
|
Red-eyed Moderator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Posts: 17,525
|
Either would be just fine. I personally would go XP.
__________________
-At Ford, quality is job #1, job #2 is making them explode. ~Norm MacDonald, SNL News -Switching to Glide..Balancing in my head..inside of me... taking the glide path instead. |
|
|
|
|
07-15-2002, 12:59 PM
|
#3 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SouthCentralTexas
Posts: 238
|
XP PRO
|
|
|
|
|
07-15-2002, 02:03 PM
|
#4 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,372
|
Thanks, any reasoning? I have heard about XP hugging memory?
|
|
|
|
|
07-15-2002, 02:06 PM
|
#5 |
|
Premium Member
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 9,231
|
You mentioned stability and security... it depends on how critical the machine is. If it is mission-critical, I would go with a bug fixed, service pack-ed Win2K prof.
|
|
|
|
|
07-15-2002, 02:20 PM
|
#6 |
|
HOT ROD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: On the Edge
Posts: 4,565
|
I have that same board and with a 1.2 Celeron with XP home running flawlessly now going on 5+ months. The wife uses it daily mostly with office 2000, e-mail and web browsing and never complains in fact doesn’t want me touching it.
__________________
Fast enough 2 get by.....old enough 2 know what not 2 try -You know it was me 
|
|
|
|
|
07-16-2002, 05:37 PM
|
#7 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 33
   |
If you have a slow computer then the Luna interface can make your computer drag. As you have a 1.4 GHz CPU I don't think you have anything to worry about.
|
|
|
|
|
07-16-2002, 07:43 PM
|
#8 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,372
|
Thanks for all your input.
|
|
|
|
|
07-17-2002, 01:02 AM
|
#9 |
|
Member (14 bit)
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Christmas, Florida
Posts: 10,654
|
I have run both systems on that board, and I agree that eather one will do just fine for you.
|
|
|
|
|
07-17-2002, 05:56 AM
|
#10 |
|
Member (2 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2
|
I would go 2000 pro it's the best os to date (I think) stable definitly secure and pretty darn efficent if you ask me doesnt use more resources than it needs (unlike XP)
|
|
|
|
|
07-17-2002, 11:59 PM
|
#11 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 3,261
|
XP supports more hardware and software. Since it replaces 2000, the days for 2000 specific drivers are numbered. Plus it just offers more features. 2000 is a great OS also but XP is where things are headed and headed fast.
|
|
|
|
|
07-18-2002, 12:43 AM
|
#12 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Basking Ridge, NJ
Posts: 334
|
Between the two...I recommend XP as well. 2000 is rock solid from my experiences with it. Been running XP since November (I think) and after two re-installs and fine tuning and a new case as of March....I have found it to be more stable than the 2000 boxes I work with. And as Tuf said...ditto.
|
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Linear Mode
