Which OS is best

[Fred666]

Been asking this in a few forums now - which is the better OS - Windows 2000 Pro of Windows XP Pro

I have both, currently using XP, but some of the advice given would indicate that 2000 Pro would be better

My system:

XP1700+
FX5600
512MB RAM
80Gb HDD
I maily use it for surfing, d/l music and movies and play a few games - doom 3, halo etc

What is the experts advice?

[DMR]

As yours is a subjective, "opinion" type question rather than an actual technical question/problem concerning Win 2K or XP, the Geek's Lounge is really the more suitable forum for this thread. I'm moving it there now...

[Fred666]

Thank you for moving it to the correct place

[DMR]

No sweat- that's what I get paid for.


...Oh, wait- it's the job I don't get paid for, isn't it? :D

[Catweazle]

If you plan on installing recent PC games on your system, there is simply no contest. Windows XP is the OS of choice!

[Fred666]

If you plan on installing recent PC games on your system, there is simply no contest. Windows XP is the OS of choice!

Why is that - Win2000Pro is supposed to be more stable - or is it due to compatability with the newer games?

[Catweazle]

Windows XP is an OS designed with games in mind, Windows 2000 is not. XP has better all-around driver support for components, better compatibility with games (particularly older ones), and features 'out of the box' which suit the needs of gamers quite well.

The stability issue is, quite frankly, a myth. Windows XP s the stablest version of Windows I've used, without a doubt.

[Fred666]

Thank you for your advice

[WeldonGeezer]

I use both ... they each have strengths ... Win 2000 has given me less cause to be concerne about older software ... Win XP Pro ... a delight to use with newer applications --- Mind you they are installed on different hardware bases as well with the Win 2000 on an AMD T-Bird 1333 with a gig of ram and a 64 mb vid card ... The XP Pro is on an AMD 64 3200 with a gig of ram and a 128 mb vid card ... mileage varies -- the Win 2000 box burns CD's and runs office apps quicker -- but the 64 does video editing and DVD's to beat the band ....

[Fred666]

Mmm - I didn't think it was completely clear-cut.

As I have already got Win98SE, XP Pro and Linux multi-booting, I may dump Linux and go with 2000 Pro - just for a change,you know.

[DMR]

I may dump Linux and go with 2000 Pro

Since you have an 80G hard drive, why dump Linux? You can just add 2K to your existing installs and have a quad-boot system.

[Fred666]

To be honest, although I like the idea of Linux, I never seem to have the time to sit and learn it properly.

I learnt BASIC, then DOS then Windows - I don't really fancy another learning curve.

I just put it on my system, play with it for a few weeks and take it off again and wait for a new, easier to use release to come along.

Currently tried Mandrake, Xandros, SUSE, Knoppix etc.

Knoppix seems the easiest so far, as it recognised all my hardware including my cable modem, which is connect to a USB port - the other builds all wanted a network connection.

[hexstar]

Been asking this in a few forums now - which is the better OS - Windows 2000 Pro of Windows XP Pro

I have both, currently using XP, but some of the advice given would indicate that 2000 Pro would be better

My system:

XP1700+ FX5600 512MB RAM 80Gb HDD I maily use it for surfing, d/l music and movies and play a few games - doom 3, halo etc

What is the experts advice?

I'd recommend either Suse (good for beginners) or Mandrake, both are way better the windows will ever be and I believe Mandrake's free too (FYI the Professional version of Suses is way better then the free version)

[Catweazle]

Dude, you tell me how to play Halo and Doom3 under Suse or Mandrake and I'll give you a bloody gold star!

[felgall]

Since Windows XP is actually the next version after Windows 2000 in the same operating system series, Microsoft must think that XP is better than 2000 or they wouldn't have made the changes. By that same logic Windows 2003 must be better than XP since it is more recent still.

In my opinion the "best" operating system is the one that does what you want in the way that you want. If you are looking for the most secure operating system it will probably be not as user friendly as less secure ones. If you are looking for an operating system to run specific application software then you wont be interested in operating systems that can't run that software no matter how much "better" that OS is. Unless you have a reason to change the best operating system for any particular person is the one that their computer is currently running.

[Catweazle]

felgall, Windows 2003 isn't precisely part of the 'same series'. It's a server OS, not a desktop one.