Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 44934	2004-05-03 22:24:00	Win 2000 better than Win XP ?	Steve_L (763)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
234064	2004-05-04 02:54:00	Okay, thats weird? Lo's post was 3rd fromthe bottom b4? ?:|	hamstar (4)
234065	2004-05-04 02:59:00	the reg? Hell bells,right click the desktop and change the scheme,that removes all the window dressing immediatly. done. Another right click on the tool bar and you choose classic. BOOM. job done,you now have a flat boring interface thats near identical to win2000.	metla (154)
234066	2004-05-04 03:03:00	thats just the interface. What about all the tangled wires behind it?	hamstar (4)
234067	2004-05-04 03:07:00	apply patches,leave the services alone. Like i said before,use hardware thats up to the job and be happy.Turning off the services gives no increase in speed or stability. And the same holes being explioted in xp are being explioted in w2k,so how are the services running in xp a problem when they aren't in w2k?	metla (154)
234068	2004-05-04 03:51:00	> 4 seconds? You think the average n00b or even above > average n00b is going to be bothered wading through > the registry and services for at least a half hour? What?? You don't need to fiddle around in the registry at all to turn off the services... > Yes good on him... he has the marketing strategy of > the century. However he still steals souls. Right... so for all the people out there, this is just biased nonsense you've chosen to impart on the rest of others without a shred of proof nor a reasonable explanation of your dislike of Bill Gates. > Of course... with any normal O/S. XP comes with all > that junk preloaded ;-) And what about the junk P2P apps people love to install? What do you think caused your client's PC to freeze up? No doubt with all the spyware and damage caused by installing various programs on the net? > > And your point is? How does being "in yer face" > affect its stability and performance? > Its just plain annoying and tryhard. And how does that affect its stability and performance? How about answering the question without resorting to bashing the cosmetics of the OS? > We still haven't hit 5Ghz yet. Do you need 5Ghz to run XP? > Stoopid cosmetic features like XP's take memory, not > to mention sanity. Which we've already discussed can be turned off easily... how much memory do you really think XP would suck up? I bet you Norton Antivirus is much more resource hungry than AVG... which kind of makes me laugh when you tell us how resource hungry XP is, and yet you go install Norton on other PC's... > So? In four years 2k has 4 SP's. In two XP has two > sp's. Its right on par. 2nd one hasn't even been released yet. > Am I supposed to wait 5 minutes for My Computer to > open? Mine boots in under 30 seconds from the time I turn it on. 5 minutes?? I doubt it. If it **DID** take that time, go use 98SE or 95... > What misperceptions? :D No need to comment here... > > I also build machines for gamers and my OS of choice > is 2000 for these rather than XP. > Me too! Strange... I've benched my machine running a clean install of Win2k and also a clean install of XP Pro... XP Pro gave me higher benchmarks in 3DMark01, 3DMark03 and also SiSoft Sandra. > If I ever have to use XP, It'll only be in some sort > of decent shape. XP SP4 then? To be honest, I am really surprised you are pushing Win2K SP4... have you even looked at the EULA in SP4?? > And plus that XP Network Wizard. WTF is up with > that! Let me put in the raw settings! Ummm... you can. You can even sidestep the whole network wizard too. > I think you've all been brainwashed by some hidden > pattern in that blue start button. Again... the fascination with the colour of the start button? Oh gee - that's a really good way of deciding whether or not to use an OS... "What colour is the start button again?" Lo.	Lohsing (219)
234069	2004-05-04 05:13:00	...actually, it's generally the ones that moan about all the bright colours of XP who then use a program to alter their OS shell to something probably even more garish! The 'look at my desktop' threads show that :)	Jester (13)
234070	2004-05-04 05:16:00	I must be a freak,i like the way XP looks. Well,the silver scheme anyway.	metla (154)
234071	2004-05-04 05:18:00	> I must be a freak,i like the way XP looks. > > Well,the silver scheme anyway. yeah me too	Jester (13)
234072	2004-05-04 05:38:00	i had to use win 2k once and please dear god let me never have to go back to that experience, crashing every 5 mins after a fresh install on a brand new system, it didnt recognise half of the hardware in the comp and on top of that it was slow as hell, we proceeded to put in win xp pro and it has never crashed since, the computer takes about 15 seconds to start up and everything opens instantly, plus i had no hardware recognition issues (oh and by the way if you hadnt figured it out by now this is my new computer i am talking about). so i say go for xp and leave the buggy past behind us	robert6655 (5176)
234073	2004-05-04 06:19:00	Lohsing. Benchmarks are fun to run but they have no relevence (IMHO) to any measurement of what makes a good gaming PC. It matters little if a machine produces a high framerate when any machine over 2ghz with a 3D card produces more frames than are required by the human brain to interpret. A gaming machine requires grunt, great hardware and a stable OS that can handle all the requirements. In my experience thats 2000. I have spent hours and hours with some XP installs that hate modern copy protection (rare with 2000 in my experience), bluescreen when a game crashes (I personally have never blue screened from a game under 2000, the most I have to do is CTl/Alt/Del and kill the game process then carry on computing or start the game again) and crash in a fiery heap with driver installs. Another thing I have found with 2000 is its more efficient use of system memory when gaming which means you can run a game better on a 2000 machine with less memory than a XP machine. I constantly see XP machines choke with less thn half a gig of ram with graphically intensive games and advanced AIs. There are some good ideas in XP but it strikes me that XP is in fact 2000ME with all the horror implied by labelling it ME (ME is regarded worldwide as the worst widely used consumer OS, in fact I ban ME from my gaming lans completely).	John Grieve (367)
1 2 3 4 5 6