Windows 2000 or XP?

By Vehementi · 21 replies
Jul 29, 2002
  1. First off, don't kick me if there's already a thread about this, I searched extensively for it but couldn't find anything.

    I'd like to know what the advantages of Windows XP are over 2000, or vice versa. I'm considering buying a new OS soon, since ME is such a slow, buggy, insecure and useless piece of junk. (Don't even get me started)

    I kinda favor 2k, because I really don't like the user-friendliness of XP (Go ahead, call me crazy...), 2k just seems more appealing, to me, IMHO.

    I was reading up on the What OS do you use? thread and everyone said 2k and XP are on their own level, I'm very curious as to which has more security, compatibility...the normal characteristics of an OS.

    Having used XP in the past, I must say I don't enjoy the new interface. To me the classic start menu with everything in it, not just everything I use every day, is quite better.

    Thanks in advance :D
  2. Cucumber

    Cucumber TS Rookie Posts: 154

    I upgraded from ME to 2k, and i love it...Its been on my PC for 3 months now, and it hasnt crashed once :cool: ...(apart from my IBM HDD failing ...but dont get my started on that) Its stable as a rock, and although RAM use is high, i've got 512mb..and all i do is play CS:p so i dont notice at all!
    3DMark was 9310 in ME, and is now 9425 in 2000!
    Boot up speeds arent as fast, but once i've got my new MAXTOR HDD;) then i can leave it on so i wont need to boot it up very often anyway

    Definatly reccomended by me :grinthumb
  3. Rick

    Rick TechSpot Staff Posts: 4,572   +65

    For "up to dateness" sake, I would pick XP just because it is the "mainstream" OS, therefore I really feel it gets priority from software designers and driver developers.

    I know you do not like XP though... ;)

    For stability, I favor Windows 2000. I've had more problems with Windows XP than 2000, but nothing big... A little explorer problem here and there and some weird things that are generally harmless. I'm sure it's been the other way around for other people though. Stability is always very subjective.

    Honestly, aside from the product activiation, slightly better support for gaming and lots of fluff, there's not much difference between the two. There's nothing "revolutionary" I can think of that XP offers over 2000. Perhaps the ability to login to one session while leaving another login session running. Logging in two users at once without closing their programs might be useful to you..? And system restore would be considered a pretty good plus I would imagine, but that's about it. Hmm..


    I don't know, if I had to choose between the two, I'd pick XP (Unless Windows 2000 was considerably cheaper). My decision would be based on the few extra features that come with XP. There ARE things that are useful that come with XP, like System Restore and multiple logins ect.. But do the benefits outweigh your wallet? That's the question. I'm not really sure what 2000 goes for anymore, but I'm sure it is cheaper than XP.
  4. Butterball

    Butterball TS Rookie Posts: 75

    well i like 2k as a gaming and general use sytem XP is funs, handles game play and is fairly stable but far too big brother for my tastes. so i chose 2k any day of the week
  5. LNCPapa

    LNCPapa TS Special Forces Posts: 4,276   +461

    I'd have to say WinXP unless you were going to do some Server flavor of Win2K. You could always install WinXP and change it to a classic environment - it would look just like Win2K then. Also change your control panels to classic and you should feel right @home! You'll get better driver support out-of-box from XP and faster boot times as well. I don't have much to complain about in WinXP except maybe some small file sharing things, but I can live with them.

  6. Vehementi

    Vehementi TechSpot Paladin Topic Starter Posts: 2,704

    Ah yes, something else I forgot to mention...

    What are the advantages of WinXP not being built on top of DOS, like 2k? That was the other thing that bothered me.

    I'm a big stability freak, having such a bad experience with ME :dead:

    That was a very good point you made Rick. I'll check up on the prices of both OS's...

    Looking at the, I noticed 2k Pro was $15 more than XP Home. But I don't want a Home version :D

    I'm torn between the two, but now I'm drifting a little toward XP...
  7. LNCPapa

    LNCPapa TS Special Forces Posts: 4,276   +461

    Keep drifting!!! XP Pro is the way to go! Do it now! Moley, moley, moley.

  8. Rick

    Rick TechSpot Staff Posts: 4,572   +65

    It's more like XP is built on 2000, rather than 2000 is built on DOS. Windows 2000 has NOTHING to do with DOS whatsoever, so you may have heard some misinformation. Windows 95, 98 and Me were all based on DOS though.. XP and 2000 do away with this.

    The advantages are stability, security and speed. Rather than having a clown suit for some half-assed sub operating system, you've got the real thing.. Real long file names, support for a fast, advanced file system that supports many security features, far superior memory usage, tighter control over your hardware and better multi-tasking capabilities. Thanks to getting rid of DOS, you can now support up to 2TB drives and can have files over the old 2gb limit. Windows 2000/XP also make use of more than 128mb of memory now, which is good for your 256mb of RAM. ;)

    Windows XP home edition has some crippled networking (from what I hear), but most of the other stuff is intact. I think Microsoft has a listing of the features (or lack thereof) on their site. The Professional version should be almost $200 USD. You might be able to find an OEM copy for much cheaper, or get a student discount if you are in college.
  9. Butterball

    Butterball TS Rookie Posts: 75

    if u do go with XP you must get the pro. versian. home has some networking ... features and has lots of tattle tale reporting tools. that is one of the bigest issues and why 2k is so popular
  10. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    I've used 2K for quite a while now & just switched to XP.

    As Papa says, you can come back to a 2K look very quickly; just ask for Windows to use the "classic windows" theme & you're all set.

    I've been using XP for a few days & there are a few quirks here & there but there are also many good things that 2K doesn't have. USer Switching is very usefull ( as long as you're not the only one using the PC ).

    HDD speeds seems to be better. I can load my mp3s much faster then on 2K.
  11. guyferd

    guyferd TS Rookie Posts: 31

    Which one?

    hmm.. which one?
    I'd rather use XP than Win2k. XP is loading faster than win2k (I use XP now). And XP support application compatibility mode for win95, 2k,.. so I don't afraid about imcompatible for software that I already have. About the New Look (start menu), you can change it to classic view, it will look like win2k. For the security, I think XP have the same security with Win2k because XP is built in NT based too. Or maybe XP is better. For example, you can choose the security of file sharing. You can change the security like Win98 or win2k. Soooooo.............

    WINDOWS XP... hurayyyy :D
  12. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    I'm back on 2K now.:blackeye:

    I kept having too many bugs in XP ( might be the ATI drivers, not sure ).

    I'll give it another try once the service pack comes out. When is that due ?
  13. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 10,742   +421

    Sometime this summer
  14. TS | Thomas

    TS | Thomas TS Rookie Posts: 1,319

    Make that, now!
  15. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Posts: 5,734   +8

    I have switched back to predominately using Windows 2000, but only because I am using the server nowadays, and don't bother with workstation version OSes on my machine any more apart from a small legacy windows 98 partition for playing some older games.

    I HATE all that BS about "click here to sign up to MSN!" and all that you get when you first install Windows XP. Also not fond of activation either and as platform Windows 2000 is far less buggy being now on its third service pack.

    It might look less pretty but I think its got definate advances over the buggier Windows XP at this current time.
  16. ss1

    ss1 TS Rookie Posts: 94

    Windows 2000 SP3 here :). Acutally I got Win2K Full Version pretty cheap for £40 only due to MS's Student licencing program two years ago :). I did have WinXP but I hated it.

  17. Rick

    Rick TechSpot Staff Posts: 4,572   +65

    August 28th, according to the "grapevine".
  18. Mudshark

    Mudshark TS Rookie Posts: 101

    I have also returned to the more stable W2K. I ran XP for about
    3 months and had sorted out most of the "bugs" ..... in W2K I
    never had any. Ghost makes it easy to flip flop between OSes.
    So I'm also waiting for a servicepack ... then I might try it again.
    I don't mind the look and feel of XP - it's kind of like Linux... my
    other favorite Os. ;)
  19. Cryo

    Cryo TS Rookie Posts: 49

    I currently use both XP and 2000. In my opinion they both have their ups and downs. I use 2000pro on my server box, which is stable and I hardly ever have a problem with. I use XPpro on my laptop mainly due to it's speed factor. See XP allows you to use no swap file, which will increase your speed tremendously since it uses your ram rather than your hard disk, which a LOT faster than your hard drive, espically on my laptop hard drive. It all depends on what you are going to be using the system for I guess.

    PS. I wouldn't suggest using the no swap file option unless you have at LEAST 512MB of memory.
  20. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 10,742   +421

  21. StormBringer

    StormBringer TS Maniac Posts: 2,244

  22. Greeno

    Greeno TS Rookie Posts: 281

    I'm on 2k, I was using XP for sometime, altho...after awhile, it started to become slloooooow...i dunno why, it felt like 98 all over again, i dunno if it's just me tho :p but 2k's been fine for along time now, but XP seemed to be eating itself up...

    I had a seperate drive being used for my swap file and 512MB PC800 RDRAM, and a P4 2.0a so it wasnt my machine :-\
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...