win 2000 v XP ?

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Homeworker, Jun 9, 2007.

  1. Homeworker

    Homeworker Guest

    I have been trying to find a comparison of the difference
    between win 2000 pro and XP

    googling hasnt found me a list of comaparisons

    can anyone shed any light or offer a site ?

    PEG
    Homeworker, Jun 9, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Homeworker

    Mike Easter Guest

    Homeworker wrote:
    > I have been trying to find a comparison of the difference
    > between win 2000 pro and XP
    >
    > googling hasnt found me a list of comaparisons
    >
    > can anyone shed any light or offer a site ?


    A fairly good description of W2K is here
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2000 Windows 2000

    .... a sketchy comparison is here
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Windows_versions Comparison
    of Microsoft Windows versions

    .... where you need to look at the numerous different tables to compare
    features...

    and a more comprehensive description of XP is here
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP Windows XP

    If you are going to compare W2K Pro with some XP or another, it is
    important to get squared away on which particular XP you are talking
    about -- eg XP Media Center is a version of XP Pro rather than XP home
    and XP home is fairly different from XP Pro.

    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Jun 9, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Homeworker

    Whiskers Guest

    On 2007-06-09, Homeworker <> wrote:
    > I have been trying to find a comparison of the difference
    > between win 2000 pro and XP
    >
    > googling hasnt found me a list of comaparisons
    >
    > can anyone shed any light or offer a site ?
    >
    > PEG


    You'd think Microsoft would have some sort of web site by now, wouldn't
    you?

    --
    -- ^^^^^^^^^^
    -- Whiskers
    -- ~~~~~~~~~~
    Whiskers, Jun 9, 2007
    #3
  4. Homeworker

    Homeworker Guest

    Mike that was very useful

    I would gather by reading that if its just an email/surf machine
    then this will do fine ,


    "Mike Easter" <> wrote in message
    news:466abada$0$97249$...
    > Homeworker wrote:
    >> I have been trying to find a comparison of the difference
    >> between win 2000 pro and XP
    >>
    >> googling hasnt found me a list of comaparisons
    >>
    >> can anyone shed any light or offer a site ?

    >
    > A fairly good description of W2K is here
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2000 Windows 2000
    >
    > ... a sketchy comparison is here
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Windows_versions Comparison
    > of Microsoft Windows versions
    >
    > ... where you need to look at the numerous different tables to compare
    > features...
    >
    > and a more comprehensive description of XP is here
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP Windows XP
    >
    > If you are going to compare W2K Pro with some XP or another, it is
    > important to get squared away on which particular XP you are talking
    > about -- eg XP Media Center is a version of XP Pro rather than XP home
    > and XP home is fairly different from XP Pro.
    >
    > --
    > Mike Easter
    >
    Homeworker, Jun 9, 2007
    #4
  5. Homeworker

    Mike Easter Guest

    Homeworker wrote:
    > I would gather by reading that if its just an email/surf machine
    > then this will do fine ,


    The biggest problem with using a Win2K box in MS's default mode is the
    integration of an insecure browser IE6 + and its insecure IE-engined
    mailuser agent with an inherently insecure MS OS if those elements are
    managed/configured by a user who has insecure browsing and mailhandling
    habits and configurations.

    This is also a great problem with WinXP, which is why there are so many
    millions of trojanized XP zombies, in spite of the fact that XP should
    have been more secure in its configurations out of the box..

    Personally I would rather have a Win2K OS than XP because of the ease of
    using/installing it on alternate machines because of the absence of the
    MS system of WPA which was introduced with XP. No matter which MS OS
    you use, you should be configuring yourself more securely than the
    average user does. If you are going to use OE as your mailuser agent,
    its relationship with IE should be very very tight/secure/restricted.
    You should use a different browser than IE6, which is very primitive -
    perhaps something like Opera9 or Firefox2.

    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Jun 9, 2007
    #5
  6. Homeworker

    WhzzKdd Guest

    "Whiskers" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 2007-06-09, Homeworker <> wrote:
    >> I have been trying to find a comparison of the difference
    >> between win 2000 pro and XP
    >>
    >> googling hasnt found me a list of comaparisons
    >>
    >> can anyone shed any light or offer a site ?
    >>
    >> PEG

    >
    > You'd think Microsoft would have some sort of web site by now, wouldn't
    > you?
    >

    LMAO!!
    WhzzKdd, Jun 9, 2007
    #6
  7. Homeworker wrote:

    > I have been trying to find a comparison of the difference
    > between win 2000 pro and XP
    >
    > googling hasnt found me a list of comaparisons
    >
    > can anyone shed any light or offer a site ?
    >

    XP offers some advantages (firewall, prefetching and others) and some bloat
    as well, compared to 2K.
    The main difference on the surface is in the GUI and the activation
    procedure not implemented in 2K.
    --
    vista policy violation: Microsoft optical mouse found penguin patterns
    on mousepad. Partition scan in progress to remove offending
    incompatible products. Reactivate MS software.
    Linux 2.6.17mm,Xorg7.2/nvidia [LinuxCounter#295241,ICQ#4918962]
    Walter Mautner, Jun 9, 2007
    #7
  8. Homeworker

    Mike Yetto Guest

    While talking to the fat hobbitses Whiskers said...

    > On 2007-06-09, Homeworker <> wrote:
    >> I have been trying to find a comparison of the difference
    >> between win 2000 pro and XP
    >>
    >> googling hasnt found me a list of comaparisons
    >>
    >> can anyone shed any light or offer a site ?
    >>
    >> PEG

    >
    > You'd think Microsoft would have some sort of web site by
    > now, wouldn't you?
    >


    I'll take a stab at summarizing what would probably be there...

    Windows 2000 Pro -- Very old, consider upgrading to XP Home

    Windows XP Home -- Old, consider upgrading to Vista

    Windows Vista -- Not yet ripe, consider upgrading your meds.

    Mike "HTH, HAND" Yetto
    --
    "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free
    government ought to be to trust no man living with power to
    endanger the public liberty."
    - John Adams
    Mike Yetto, Jun 9, 2007
    #8
  9. Homeworker

    elaich Guest

    Mike Yetto <> wrote in
    news::

    > Windows 2000 Pro -- Very old, consider upgrading to XP Home


    I have both of them, and my preference is 2000. About all XP did was add a
    bunch of window dressing and a silly little dog. Oh, and become about twice
    as bloated, while offering very little more.

    2000 is a mature OS. It's unlikely that any more exploits will be found,
    and if there are, they will affect XP also, as they have the same code
    base.

    --
    A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
    Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
    elaich, Jun 9, 2007
    #9
  10. Homeworker

    Mike Yetto Guest

    While talking to the fat hobbitses elaich said...

    > Mike Yetto <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >> Windows 2000 Pro -- Very old, consider upgrading to XP
    >> Home

    >
    > I have both of them, and my preference is 2000. About all
    > XP did was add a bunch of window dressing and a silly
    > little dog. Oh, and become about twice as bloated, while
    > offering very little more.
    >


    I, too, consider Win 2K to be the peak accomplishment. However,
    I reloaded thet machine with Kunbuntu and have no regrets.

    > 2000 is a mature OS. It's unlikely that any more exploits
    > will be found, and if there are, they will affect XP also,
    > as they have the same code base.
    >


    But, you may not get a fix for Win2K, especially if the
    problem/fix is tied to IE7 and whatever they're calling Lookout
    and Lookout Distress these days.

    Mike "that's some catch, that Catch 22" Yetto
    --
    "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free
    government ought to be to trust no man living with power to
    endanger the public liberty."
    - John Adams
    Mike Yetto, Jun 9, 2007
    #10
  11. Mike Yetto wrote:

    > While talking to the fat hobbitses elaich said...
    >> I have both of them, and my preference is 2000. About all XP did was
    >> add a bunch of window dressing and a silly little dog. Oh, and
    >> become about twice as bloated, while offering very little more.


    ...and Win2K will run ok on 256MB of ram (though more is better).

    > I, too, consider Win 2K to be the peak accomplishment. However, I
    > reloaded thet machine with Kunbuntu and have no regrets.


    I'll agree that Win2K was/is their best. Very stable, and still
    supported through 2012.

    >> 2000 is a mature OS. It's unlikely that any more exploits will be
    >> found, and if there are, they will affect XP also, as they have the
    >> same code base.

    >
    > But, you may not get a fix for Win2K, especially if the problem/fix
    > is tied to IE7


    No need to worry about IE7 on Win2K; you can't install it. Use a modern
    browser in any case. Firefox, Opera...

    > and whatever they're calling Lookout and Lookout
    > Distress these days.


    "Windows Mail". Looks like Lookout Distress. <g>

    The overwhelming reason for most home users to not upgrade is that they
    don't do anything with their computers that Win2K won't do just fine.

    Use modern, secure programs, instead of any of the Microsloth stuff.

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Jun 9, 2007
    #11
  12. Homeworker

    philo Guest

    "Homeworker" <> wrote in message
    news:glyai.8063$...
    >I have been trying to find a comparison of the difference
    > between win 2000 pro and XP
    >
    > googling hasnt found me a list of comaparisons
    >
    > can anyone shed any light or offer a site ?
    >
    > PEG
    >



    Win2k and XP are pretty much the same OS...
    XP has system restore...Win2k does not
    XP has msconfig...Win2k does not
    XP has a better driver base


    other than that...most of the rest of XP is just bloat. (IMHO)


    One thing I've noticed though is that msconfig from win98 or XP will work
    with win2k...
    also in general...XP drivers will work with win2k...

    I personally setup a lot of lower-end machines with win2K and they work
    fine...
    they'd be quite sluggish with XP.

    Right out of the box...Win2k is a rather insecure OS...
    so it's important to perfom all critical updates...
    and use a virus checker etc!
    philo, Jun 10, 2007
    #12
  13. Homeworker

    elaich Guest

    Mike Yetto <> wrote in
    news::

    > But, you may not get a fix for Win2K, especially if the
    > problem/fix is tied to IE7 and whatever they're calling Lookout
    > and Lookout Distress these days.


    M$ is still releasing critical updates for 2000. IE7 is not an issue, since
    2000 can't run it. Neither is Outhouse Distress for me, since I don't use
    it, and forbid it net access with my firewall.

    --
    A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
    Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
    elaich, Jun 10, 2007
    #13
  14. Homeworker

    elaich Guest

    Walter Mautner <> wrote in
    news::

    > XP offers some advantages (firewall, prefetching and others) and some
    > bloat as well, compared to 2K.


    I know how to install my own firewall, thank you. And, guess what? The one
    I will install works in both directions!

    > The main difference on the surface is in the GUI and the activation
    > procedure not implemented in 2K.


    Don't need the GUI, and not needing the activation is a good thing.



    --
    A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
    Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
    elaich, Jun 10, 2007
    #14
  15. Homeworker

    elaich Guest

    "philo" <> wrote in
    news::

    > XP has a better driver base


    Yeah, that is one drawback with W2K. I spent a lot of time finding the
    drivers for my machine. However, now I have them, and they are stored on my
    hard drive.

    --
    A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
    Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
    elaich, Jun 10, 2007
    #15
  16. Homeworker

    elaich Guest

    "philo" <> wrote in
    news::

    > Right out of the box...Win2k is a rather insecure OS...
    > so it's important to perfom all critical updates...
    > and use a virus checker etc!


    Yes, it is. I think I read that there were over 600 bugs in W2K originally.
    Install Service Pack 4, and then, all the updates since.

    --
    A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
    Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
    elaich, Jun 10, 2007
    #16
  17. Homeworker

    philo Guest

    "elaich" <> wrote in message news:...
    > "philo" <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > > Right out of the box...Win2k is a rather insecure OS...
    > > so it's important to perfom all critical updates...
    > > and use a virus checker etc!

    >
    > Yes, it is. I think I read that there were over 600 bugs in W2K

    originally.
    > Install Service Pack 4, and then, all the updates since.
    >
    >



    Here is what I did:


    http://www.majorgeeks.com/download4817.html


    it's the unofficial sp5

    when slipstreamed into a win2k installation cd puts in IE6 and about half
    the updates.
    The first time you go to the Windows update site , there will be an
    additional 34 updates...
    so it will save a bit of time.

    I also took msconfig from an XP install

    plus decompressed all the XP .inf files and driver cabs...
    put them all in a folder and burned them to a cd.

    Now when I do a win2k install and there are drivers missing...
    I have most of them all in one place.

    With 256 megs of RAM...Win2k will run fine on as little as a p-233

    and any CPU that's 350 mhz or above...will probably work OK with as little
    as 128 megs of ram
    philo, Jun 10, 2007
    #17
  18. Homeworker

    Alfred Guest

    On 10 Jun 2007 05:52:55 GMT, elaich <> wrote:

    >"philo" <> wrote in
    >news::
    >
    >> Right out of the box...Win2k is a rather insecure OS...
    >> so it's important to perfom all critical updates...
    >> and use a virus checker etc!

    >
    >Yes, it is. I think I read that there were over 600 bugs in W2K originally.
    >Install Service Pack 4, and then, all the updates since.


    I'm in the process of reinstalling Win2K on a 500Mhz 128Mb ram
    machine. No network card so I had to download SP4 and burn it to cd
    then transfer it across. Then I was able to install all the software
    that wouldn't install without SP4. Runs okay apart from him not being
    able to watch DVDs. Needs to get his hands in pockets and upgrade. :)

    Just waiting for the owner to come back and take it away so I can get
    back to my novel.
    Alfred, Jun 10, 2007
    #18
  19. Homeworker

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:14:48 +0100, Alfred wrote:

    > Just waiting for the owner to come back and take it away so I can get
    > back to my novel.


    Writing or reading?

    --
    Registered Linux User 413057.
    Both Mandriva 2007.1 and Ubuntu 7.04
    You can have it all. My empire of hurt.

    Liverpool F.C.-more European Cups than all
    the other English teams put together :)
    Aardvark, Jun 10, 2007
    #19
  20. Homeworker

    Mike Yetto Guest

    While talking to the fat hobbitses elaich said...

    > Mike Yetto <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >> But, you may not get a fix for Win2K, especially if the
    >> problem/fix is tied to IE7 and whatever they're calling
    >> Lookout and Lookout Distress these days.

    >
    > M$ is still releasing critical updates for 2000. IE7 is not
    > an issue, since 2000 can't run it. Neither is Outhouse
    > Distress for me, since I don't use it, and forbid it net
    > access with my firewall.
    >


    Ok, then let me clarify my statement. If the critical fix that
    MS comes up with touches on part of the system that is tightly
    tied to IE7 or the applications formerly know as Outlook or
    Outlook Express, then it will not be available for Win2k. Or at
    least nowhere near as soon making IE7 a potential issue.

    Mike "MS == MicroSCO?" Yetto
    --
    "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free
    government ought to be to trust no man living with power to
    endanger the public liberty."
    - John Adams
    Mike Yetto, Jun 10, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Tim Kettring

    win 2000 vs win 2003

    Tim Kettring, Feb 29, 2004, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,038
    Tim Kettring
    Mar 1, 2004
  2. Fred Erfmann

    Uninstalling win 2000 and keeping the old win me

    Fred Erfmann, Jun 26, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    422
    Fred Erfmann
    Jun 26, 2003
  3. Trent C
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    570
    Billy
    Dec 17, 2003
  4. Plato

    Re: switching OS from win.2000 to win. 98se

    Plato, Feb 21, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    387
    Plato
    Feb 21, 2005
  5. Blue Villain

    Where can I find a Win Me or Win 2000 Boot Disc?

    Blue Villain, Apr 4, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,043
    Nik Schlein
    Apr 4, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page