MVPs help?

[tina]

hi folks.
i am using MSOffice2000 (may go to 2003). getting ready to
buy a pc. have always used Win2kPro OS. can somebody give
me a short opinion on how WinXP Pro stacks up against
Win2kPro for sys stability, etc, please?
TIA
tina

 

[Dave]

stability is at least as good as win2kpro. range of supported hardware is
better. included tools are better and more useful than 2k, and
configuration is easier than 2k.

 

[tina]

thanks Dave!

-----Original Message-----
stability is at least as good as win2kpro. range of supported hardware is
better. included tools are better and more useful than 2k, and
configuration is easier than 2k.




.

 

[kurttrail]

hi folks.
i am using MSOffice2000 (may go to 2003). getting ready to
buy a pc. have always used Win2kPro OS. can somebody give
me a short opinion on how WinXP Pro stacks up against
Win2kPro for sys stability, etc, please?
TIA
tina

For system stability there really is no question, 2K beats XP hands
down. I use both on a daily basis. XP at work & 2K on my personal home
computer. 2K is NT 5.0, and XP is NT 5.1. and the .1 is mostly eye
candy and MS middleware crap.

But this group is dominated by XP groupies, that only use XP on a daily
basis, so I'm sure that my opinion will be in the minority here.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[ra]

No chance of me ever being an MVP but here is my 2 cents worth. I use both
Win2kPro and WinXP Pro every day at work and I have never had any real
problems with either one. I installed something that caused a blue screen
once on my own machine running W2K but I knew exactly why it happened and I
was able to remove the offending app and fix it up just fine. I was a bit
reluctant to move the office PCs to XP because the W2K machines were so
stable, and I was afraid I would start having problems. But I now have 25 XP
machines running in the office that I set up from an image I built and none
has had any major issues. I will add that even though the PCs came from Dell
with XP OEM on them. I built an image using XP Pro Volume License version
and set things up my way instead of the way they come out of the box.

 

[tina]

thanks!

-----Original Message-----


For system stability there really is no question, 2K beats XP hands
down. I use both on a daily basis. XP at work & 2K on my personal home
computer. 2K is NT 5.0, and XP is NT 5.1. and the .1 is mostly eye
candy and MS middleware crap.

But this group is dominated by XP groupies, that only use XP on a daily
basis, so I'm sure that my opinion will be in the minority here.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"


.

 

[tina]

thanks!

-----Original Message-----
No chance of me ever being an MVP but here is my 2 cents worth. I use both
Win2kPro and WinXP Pro every day at work and I have never had any real
problems with either one. I installed something that caused a blue screen
once on my own machine running W2K but I knew exactly why it happened and I
was able to remove the offending app and fix it up just fine. I was a bit
reluctant to move the office PCs to XP because the W2K machines were so
stable, and I was afraid I would start having problems. But I now have 25 XP
machines running in the office that I set up from an image I built and none
has had any major issues. I will add that even though the PCs came from Dell
with XP OEM on them. I built an image using XP Pro Volume License version
and set things up my way instead of the way they come out of the box.







.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

In

i am using MSOffice2000 (may go to 2003). getting ready to
buy a pc. have always used Win2kPro OS. can somebody give
me a short opinion on how WinXP Pro stacks up against
Win2kPro for sys stability, etc, please?

Both are extremely stable. Windows XP is essentially just a newer
release (Windows NT 5.1) of Windows 2000 (Windows NT 5.0). There
are a few enhancements in XP and if you are buying a new
operating system, I'd recommend XP over 2000. But if you already
had 2000 and were asking whether to upgrade, staying with what
you had would be a reasonable choice.

 

[Steve Nielsen]

Nope, I agree with you completely, but I am here because I *have* *to*
use and support XP at work. Guess I'm a minority as well.

Steve

 

[kurttrail]

Nope, I agree with you completely, but I am here because I *have* *to*
use and support XP at work. Guess I'm a minority as well.

Same with me. My boss wants XP, so I'm forced to use and support XP too.
And she even pollutes her computer with AOL.

I learned to pick my battles. I had a hard enough time convincing her to
let me remove HotBar from her computer, as she is in love with sending
emails in html. I've been procrastinating my next one, convincing her to
drop Symantec products, but I'm gonna have to do that soon as our NAV
subscriptions expire at the end of the month.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Rob Schneider]

I use both, and both are equally stable. Both will be unstable if the
underlying hardware is not of sufficient spec or quality. I don't think
in a business I would spend money to upgrade from 2000 to XP as it buys
you nothing. For the new PC you are contemplating, get it with XP.

Spend the money in a business environment on applications with added
functions that make the business money. Changing OS's won't make much
money and has few credits.

Hope this is useful to you. Let us know.

rms

 

[Steve N.]

You're lucky - I couldn't convince my boss to not go with Command a/v -
they are much worse than Norton/Symantec, especially slow at issuing
updates. I'd be much happier with NAV or SAV. At least SAV Corp Ed.
issues updates weekly (almost).

Steve

 

[Alex Nichol]

i am using MSOffice2000 (may go to 2003). getting ready to
buy a pc. have always used Win2kPro OS. can somebody give
me a short opinion on how WinXP Pro stacks up against
Win2kPro for sys stability

XP is generally reckoned to be a bit better - especially if you turn off
some of the eye-candy visual effects. There are some under the hood
improvements. I would not bother with a 2000 to XP upgrade, but if
buying new, get XP Pro