WinXP vs. Win2000 Performance

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mike
  • Start date Start date
M

Mike

Is WinXP a memory "hog"? A Win2000 laptop (650MHz/128RAM)
blows the doors off a WinXP laptop (1.2GHz/128RAM). Is
this machine just too small for WinXP. The WinXP has 28
processes running while the Win2000 has 44 processes
running. I've "ghost" the WinXP laptop and started from
scratch. Initially it is pretty fast but as soon as you
start adding applications to it, it starts to bog down.
The applications are spreadsheets/word processors. I've
perform a disk cleanup and defragged the hard drive - no
help. Fortunately the XP laptop is not mine.
Unfortunately, I have to maintain it for my father-in-
law. Any suggestions?
 
Add another 128MB RAM to your laptop. Windows XP does
indeed require more RAM to perform efficiently compared to
Windows 2000.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP Shell/User

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


| Is WinXP a memory "hog"? A Win2000 laptop (650MHz/128RAM)
| blows the doors off a WinXP laptop (1.2GHz/128RAM). Is
| this machine just too small for WinXP. The WinXP has 28
| processes running while the Win2000 has 44 processes
| running. I've "ghost" the WinXP laptop and started from
| scratch. Initially it is pretty fast but as soon as you
| start adding applications to it, it starts to bog down.
| The applications are spreadsheets/word processors. I've
| perform a disk cleanup and defragged the hard drive - no
| help. Fortunately the XP laptop is not mine.
| Unfortunately, I have to maintain it for my father-in-
| law. Any suggestions?
 
Back
Top