XP or 2K

[AlphaWolf]

They haven't changed any of the compatibility modes, they are the same. I use both OSes. In terms of compatibility, they didn't realy try to improve it with XP, they just took what 2K had and tried to make the shell more flashy in terms of graphics, along with some additions like the firewall service and some back end changes to the SMB protocol, those are the only major changes. XP actualy *breaks* compatibility as a result of these "user friendly" changes. That server is down for some reason, I bet it will be back up tommorow.

But again I ask, what are you basing these statements off of?

 

[Niggy G]

Hidden files are shown!!! lain:

are u sure there is a boot.ini in 2K?

lain:

 

[AlphaWolf]

Niggy: its there, look in the root of your boot partition.

 

[Harteex]

Dual Boot Win2k and MS-Dos

 

[Niggy G]

Ive used the search utility but it finds nothing ... (as shown)


Ive also tried looking manualy on the HD in system 32 and stuff but nothing...

What exactly do you mean by "the root of your boot partition"?



:blush:

 

[AlphaWolf]

in your run dialog, type "notepad c:\boot.ini" (no quotes), assuming that "drive c" is the partition that you boot from, which it most likely is. Make sure that you have explorer out of its default "user is a moron" mode (make it show all files, show all extentions, hidden operating system files, etc). Ignore those warnings that it gives when you turn them off, only morons need to pay attention to the warnings, because they realy are stupid.

It only makes sense after all, look at the edit button they added to the startup properties.

BTW, that edit button has nothing to do with compatibility mode, its the same thing as opening the run dialog and typing in "notepad c:\boot.ini"

Also, speaking of speed with 2K vs XP...

http://www.infoworld.com/articles/tc/xml/01/10/29/011029tcwinxp.xml

TEST CENTER PERSPECTIVE
The results of our benchmark tests indicate that Windows XP is significantly slower than Windows 2000, especially under heavy load. Unless investing in new hardware for demanding users is an option, companies should stick with Windows 2000.

About the only reason I can think of with going with XP over 2K is if you would rather have a more flashy GUI than a faster, more compatible system

 

[t0rek]

Here is the rule:

1. Win95 is out of date
2. Between Win98, Win98 SE and WinME, choose Win98 SE
3. Win2000 is very good
4. WinXP is even better than Win2000
5. All of them are M$ son don't expect any miracle with them

 

[Eagle]

Here is the rule:

1. Win95 is out of date
2. Between Win98, Win98 SE and WinME, choose Win98 SE
3. Win2000 is very good
4. WinXP is even better than Win2000
5. All of them are M$ son don't expect any miracle with them

I'll swear by rule 5.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Here is the rule:

1. Win95 is out of date
2. Between Win98, Win98 SE and WinME, choose Win98 SE
3. Win2000 is very good
4. WinXP is even better than Win2000

Almost all of you guys who say this haven't even tried 2000. Moving from 2000 to XP is like moving from 98SE to Millennium Edition. Its got more flashy shit for the user, but underneath its overall a poor quality operating system in comparison. (though I will admit, 2000 to XP isn't as much of a downgrade as 98SE to ME)

 

[Niggy G]

Im at uni now and by doing exactly the same thing as i have done at home i can find the boot.ini file easy!!

But im telling you when i get back home there is no boot.ini
on my C: (win 95) or D: (win 2K)

 

[AlphaWolf]

I don't see how it can't be there, NTLDR relies on it.

 

[Olger901]

1st Stick with 2k. XP is too slow through all its stupid features,

2nd Alot of junk is added in xp which isnt implanted in 2k Like MSN Messenger, Windows Movie Maker etc, its just a waste of diskspace.

3rd In WinXP MS Spys on u.

4th XP is slower than 2k at least on my comp it is

 

[Eagle]

1st Stick with 2k. XP is too slow through all its stupid features,

Uhh, XP is actually faster

2nd Alot of junk is added in xp which isnt implanted in 2k Like MSN Messenger, Windows Movie Maker etc, its just a waste of diskspace.

Well, you got me there, but that can be removed.

3rd In WinXP MS Spys on u.

Thats bullshit and you know it. If they spy on you in one they spy on you in the other as well.

4th XP is slower than 2k at least on my comp it is

I thought this was point #1 but we can hit it again...
It must be just your computer. XP runs much faster on every other computer Ive tried installing both of them on. If your on a network or broadband especially, 2k likes to bog down NIC cards.

 

[AlphaWolf]

2k runs much faster on every other computer Ive tried installing both of them on.

Finaly you have come to realize what I've been telling you <_<. I've never seen anything that proves otherwise, neither first hand nor on the 'net. Again, its like the difference between 98SE and ME, the one made after the other turned out worse.

 

[flow``]

i've juggled between the two Os's quite a lot lately. I guess i've gone for XP (not sure why), maybe more dev'rs are more focused on it rather then win9x/2k (and just say here's a made-for-xp piece of software, but it works on 2k too).

after you right click on my pc, settings, advanced, performance->settings "adjust for best performance".. i really have no problems. doing that made a big difference on my mom's p3 600 machine/tnt vanta/256 ram.

maybe you should give it a chance.

 

[Eagle]

Finaly you have come to realize what I've been telling you <_<. I've never seen anything that proves otherwise, neither first hand nor on the 'net. Again, its like the difference between 98SE and ME, the one made after the other turned out worse.

Oops thats a typo, must get sleep.

That was supposed to say XP not 2k.

 

[Niggy G]

I’ve found the boot.ini

I’m a bit stupid really!

I thought when you 'show hidden files' it showed everything but there’s another thing you have to uncheck as well.

Oh well its done now and thanks for everyone’s patience!

 

[t0rek]

I already tested Win2000, is good but I said, WinXP is better, I'm agree with Eagle. Perhaps is we continue discussing which OS is better, I bet Eagle will close this thread. <_<

 

[Eagle]

Yeah well it is kinda monotonous, no matter what, half of us will say XP is better, the other half will say 2k is better, there is no point it arguing about it.

 

[DuDe]

Yeah well it is kinda monotonous, no matter what, half of us will say XP is better, the other half will say 2k is better, there is no point it arguing about it.

Heh, not including the Linux users out there
Anyway, I use XP, and I like it - gaming performance isn't too shabby, I think that I uninstalled most of the unneeded crap, and the auto update service really cuts down on the size of the service packs that you have to download once in a while. I'm not saying it's better than 2K - I haven't used 2K extensively on that pc, so I can't say if it operates better here. I'm just saying that I don't want to mess around with a different OS, if the current one works ok.