|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
09-02-2003, 07:48 AM
|
#1 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 617
|
XP pro vs XP Home vs WIN2000 Pro
What is the better OS and why>?
General office usage... PIII Celeron 633mHz CPU w/ 128MB (for the time being) SDRAM 60GB Harddrive 90% free space.
__________________
O/S Win XP Pro; Serv Pack 3; IE 7.0); M/B Gigabyte GA-K8NF-9; CPU AMD 3000+ Athlon XP; System Memory 1024 MB (2x512mb Dual Channel); BIOS Type Award Modular (04/07/05); Video Adapter NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GS (256 MB); Audio Adapter Realtek AC'97 Audio Last edited by kbaasit; 09-02-2003 at 08:00 AM. |
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 07:57 AM
|
#2 |
|
Member (14 bit)
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Christmas, Florida
Posts: 10,661
|
bottom line is xp without a doubt.
but then if you inter the money factor, and a older system, then that brings in some variables. also as to what you want to do with it on a primary basis aslo has points to look at. but as far as what is the best for general use, xp-home edition can't be beat. |
|
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 08:45 AM
|
#3 |
|
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Arlington, TN
Posts: 5,538
|
Whichever choice that you use, you are going to have to increase the RAM to at least 256 to work well, 512 if using any memory hungry programs. W2K and XP are quite similar. XP has better driver support but nags you quite a bit more than W2K. XP also tries to force you to do stupid stuff like removing all of your desktop icons, etc. The performance of XP is not as good as W2K on older systems, although there is not a huge difference. I have some P3-450's at work that I always put W2K on but always put XP on newer systems.
If it is for your system at home, go with XP Home, since it is cheaper and will do what you need. |
|
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 10:31 AM
|
#4 |
|
Premium Member
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 9,231
|
For that system, I would highly recommend Win2K. The drivespace isnt the issue - the RAM and CPU speed are - they are great specs for Win2k. Nothing lost in the way of stability between 2k and XP.
XP Home is just a scaled down version (or rather dumbed down) of XP Pro. |
|
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 08:45 PM
|
#5 |
|
Computing Professor
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,718
|
The guys at Maximum PC hold that minimum specs for XP are a 1.2 GHz cpu and 256mb ram.
I'd take their word for it and follow Statica's great advice to get Windiws 2000. |
|
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 09:08 PM
|
#6 |
|
iTroll
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: 818
Posts: 2,252
|
My cousin runs Win XP pro on a 333Mhz Celeron with 256mb of ram. It seems to fine if you defragment the drive every once in a while. If you upgrade your ram then get Windows XP Pro, if not then get Windows 2000, it's just as good.
|
|
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 10:45 PM
|
#7 |
|
Mondsreitersmann
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Skingrad
Posts: 8,781
|
Windows 2k.
Whatever the OS you load be sure to go to www.blackviper.com and read the guide to disable the services you don't need.
__________________
Darum still, füg' ich mich, wie Gott es will. Nun, so will ich wacker streiten, und sollt' ich den Tod erleiden, stirbt ein braver Reitersmann. |
|
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 10:50 PM
|
#8 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 617
|
Thaznks everyone.. After removing the partitions of myHD, and then formattin it.
I then loaded WIN2000, and am enjoying it! |
|
|
|
|
09-05-2003, 12:53 PM
|
#9 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 406
|
I also like W2k over XP. (I *HATE* wizards!!) Even though XP does have a larger driver database I still find myself chasing after updated drivers from manufacturer`s websites just like with any other MS system.
As far as minimum requirements. I have XP Pro installed on a multiboot machine with a PIII 550 mhz CPU with 384 megs of PC 100 sdram and it runs great. |
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Linear Mode
