Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Win2k or XP ? (Read 17145 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Win2k or XP ?

Reply #50 –
Quote from: BradPDX on
Of course, Vista is coming eventually. Perhaps 2007, with a little luck :-)
I'm pretty excited about Vista - Beta 2 isn't without it's issues, but it's the most promising Windows beta I have ever seen. I hope Microsoft give themselves enough time to get it right before they release it.
Quote from: William on
Sorry but I disagree. I am currently running as LUA at both office and home, and ALL my programs work. Some may need modifications in ACL, but all work.

It would be good if you tell us what programs do not work in LUA.
I've had problems mainly with games. On my home PC, I have three partitions - the Debian Linux parition I do most of my work in, a pristine copy of XP and Visual C++ used for software testing and a dirty copy of XP used for gaming. I haven't struggled with LUA on the development OS, but many games seem to break or even refuse to install as a limited user. I don't game much any more (not enough time, unfortunately) so I don't recall which titles I couldn't get to work without running as admin.

Win2k or XP ?

Reply #51 –
Quote from: Patsoe on
My parents have this HP printer, the accompanying software of which apparently doesn't by default have access rights in it's own installation dir  Was very annoying, got all these untractable error messages, until I realized that the Admin account didn't get the error messages.... I guess they never noticed the problem before since most of their customers run the standard account with admin rights...

This is identified as "LUA Bug", which surely should be fixed by the developer. If you can mess with ACL I think you can find out what to modify.

Win2k or XP ?

Reply #52 –
Quote
Modern systems don't have IRQs, they (mostly) went out with ISA. What Windows reports to you is just for legacy support so that software written with them in mind can still function. Thats why on modern systems you might see 20+ IRQs even though x86 only supports 15.


This is simply not true. It is true to say that the IRQs are handled differently on an APIC capable BIOS and system. Just check out the IRQ problems that sound card manufacturers have, and give you work arounds for. The VIA and ALI chipsets are the worst offenders.

This link will bring you up to speed.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/01/04/bio...o_z/page10.html

Quote
23. Turn On APIC

The motherboard chipsets generally contain two main components usually called the north bridge and south bridge. These drive data signals between the CPU, system RAM, and expansion cards and other peripheral devices. The following configuration lets the computer handle more interrupts and thus, more devices. The total number of usable interrupts climbs from 16 to 24. In addition, interrupt handling becomes noticeably more flexible, while also leading to time savings in data management.

All you have to do is go to the "Advanced BIOS Features" menu and make sure the "APIC Mode" function is set to "Enabled".


I like the built in remote desktop feature of XP Pro. Yes, you could use VNC, but it isn't built in, and you have to track changes and security on one more application. Pro lets you join the machine to a domain as well in case you have a beefy home network.
For me it comes down to drivers and application support. Good luck getting a manufacturer to support your Win2K issues.
Don't get me wrong, Win2k was great for it's time. That time is simply past.
I did notice much better digital video and imaging support in XP. Gaming support is also better. Memory is so cheap now, having at least 512MB solves most of the XP slowness I have seen. It certainly is more resource hungry. As many have said here, you can tune down some the performance sapping glitz.

Win2k or XP ?

Reply #53 –
can anyone fill me in on these upgrade packs "model" or "part" numbers ? These are all number for XP Upgrade packs but cant seem to find any difference between them and so cant decide which I should get ?

E85-02665
E85-02666
E85-00087

--

Win2k or XP ?

Reply #54 –
A quick search points to this:

02665 - XP Pro w/SP2 Full
02666 - XP Pro w/SP2 Upgrade
00087 - XP Pro, no SP2

http://www.newegg.com has a great reputation, and good price on OEM with SP2.

Edit:
Pro has a few extra features like built in encryption, Remote desktop, and more advanced file and printer sharing. I think it is well worth the few extra dollars.

Win2k or XP ?

Reply #55 –
Quote from: goodsound on
Which one is better suited in terms of digital-audio processing (playback, recording) ?


Hi,
About digital-audio processing, there should be no difference. Well, maybe XP would perform even better (less system resources etc.), because it’s newer, that theoretically should depends on the devices and drivers though.
However, if you care about reliability of data, I would suggest you Win2000 Pro.
Please note, this is my opinion only, however it is based on a long term experience with different HW (workstations and laptops) performing heavy (and not so) daily tasks.
For more than 4 years I didn’t have even one serious problem with W2K, while now, when I’m using XP Pro, I and my colleagues have troubles every 6-8 months. Even now I have a XP machine that refuse to boot (dualboot system, but it doesn’t help) and I’m not so enthusiastic that I could recover my data (including some very rare mp3’s ).
If you are interesting in, just do a fast search in Google for, say, “Error 1516” and see how often it is related to XP.
BTW, I use W2K Pro at home, because the corporative interests cannot reach my home PC

Cheers,
Tony
 

Win2k or XP ?

Reply #56 –
Quote
For more than 4 years I didn’t have even one serious problem with W2K, while now, when I’m using XP Pro, I and my colleagues have troubles every 6-8 months. Even now I have a XP machine that refuse to boot (dualboot system, but it doesn’t help) and I’m not so enthusiastic that I could recover my data (including some very rare mp3’s smile.gif).


I have not reloaded my two XP Pro home machines for over a year. Many of our corporate XP Pro machines have not been reloaded for over two years. They are not dual boot. Looks like something in your environment.

XP Pro uses more resources than Win 2K. The default pretty icons and screen features weigh it down.