Windows 2k and XP -- Are they the same?!

Status
Not open for further replies.

SharkFiNbowL

Posts: 37   +0
Well! I always want to know this, is Windows 2k and XP basically the same, with the exception that XP has better graphics and better appearance. They are both built in the same architechture, so I don't know. Anyone help me clear this confusion out?!
 
*shakes his head*...


SNGX1275.. you know, not everyone has the TIME to do a major search on large boards, and YES this is a decently large board. There is no law against reposts. Your going a little overboard with the whole "I have authority, quit the useless threads, search before you speak" deal...

Seriously, I mean, I *KNOW* this is going to get out of hand if we start getting all serious and annoying with "dont do this" "dont do that" "HEY! you didnt search first!"...

Also, you COULD just move this thread into the old one since you know where it is. That would seem a bit more logical.
 
Originally posted by acidosmosis
not everyone has the TIME to do a major search on large boards

...And not everyone has the time to answer or sift through the same questions over and over again.

Now, I'll be honest - It would be sophomoric to expect everyone to search for every question they have before they ask - But it doesn't hurt and it is quicker to get an answer by searching than waiting for someone to reply.

I sympathize with SharkFINBowl on this one though, since "XP" isn't searchable (below 3 letters).. So I sympathize... A little. :)

BUT, another thing is I basically answered this early.. I will do so again though.

Are 2000 and XP really the same thing? Well, close enough for me. :) Obviously, 2000 is 2000 and XP is XP... But they are built on the same architecture, retain many of the same abilities and even use the same drivers. Aside from some major cosmetic and minor fuctionality changes, they are indeed the same.
 
Originally posted by acidosmosis
SNGX1275.. you know, not everyone has the TIME to do a major search on large boards, and YES this is a decently large board. There is no law against reposts. Your going a little overboard with the whole "I have authority, quit the useless threads, search before you speak" deal...
Yeh there is no law against reposts, but it took me less time to search for that same topic than it probably took you to write your complaint. I can't force you to do anything you don't want to, but there are some things that individuals can do to make things much more enjoyable around here. You posting stuff like that isn't one of them.
 
At the risk of getting my head chopped off.Shark I believe 2000 and XP Pro are built the same and XP home was structured from Win 98.
 
Originally posted by spun_1
XP home was structured from Win 98.

That is absolutely incorrect. XP Pro and Home are the same, home just doesn't have all the features that Pro has.
 
Originally posted by spun_1
At the risk of getting my head chopped off.Shark I believe 2000 and XP Pro are built the same and XP home was structured from Win 98.

Previously on Techspot:

Originally posted by spun_1
Is it fair to say XP sucks when pro is based on 2000 and XP home is based on 98?I really dont know.Im using XP PRO full version on my main PC and 98SE on another,so I dont know what XP home is like.


Reply from myself:

You might want to double check your information before you jump to conclusions.

XP Pro and XP Home are both the same operating system - Pro just has more features. By no means is XP Home (or any version of Windows XP) based on 98.

• 95/98/Me - 9x kernel
• NT/2000/XP - NT kernel

Home is identical to Pro with the exception of limited networking abilities and maybe a couple of other minimal quirks such as no support for dual processors...
 
.... the more it goes, the more i'm glad ive started the "pointless posts" thread ....

some ppl are really getting kinda hum angry ... and some of them have very good reasons for being so :p :haha:
 
I UNDERSTAND ABOUT KERNAL MODES!! THIS IS WHAT I MEANT!! EVOLVED!!!www.wown.com/j_helmig/winxppro.htm READ IT!!! Sounds like most of the whiners have dialup and take pageloading times out on people.If you think all posts are pointless go work for Microsoft.@&#% #*^ Im out!!
 
Spun_1, there is no reason to cop an attitude.
The site you linked to states that WinXP Pro is a replacement for NT/2K, which is true, and that WinXP Home is a replacement for 9x and prior, which is also true. But being a replacement for something by no means makes it based on that same thing.
 
Originally posted by spun_1
I UNDERSTAND ABOUT KERNAL MODES!!

If you undestand kernels, then you also understand that since XP Pro and XP home use the same kernel, they are essentially the same operating system.

You should also understand that 9x and XP use very different kernels, and for this reason are obviously very different.

And that, in itself, does a good job answering your questions.

Storm hit it on the head, but to elaborate.. XP Professional is to aimed to replace 2000 and NT - not because it is based on 2k - But because it is being MARKETED to business users. This is largely because it is more secure, can also be volume licensed and supports dual processors for servers and workstations. That and it is just plain expensive.

XP Home is a replacement for 98 and Me - Not because it is based on 9x - But because it is being MARKETED for home consumers. Most home users will never touch security permissions, dual processors or some of the extraneous features of Professional.

It has been designed this way so that Microsoft can make more money. Rather than offering a multi-purpose OS for 100 bucks, they offer a more expensive version for "professional" users to squeeze extra cash from companies and people who need those extra (yet basic) features.

Plainly put - XP Home and XP Professional are the same OS. And both are built on 2000.
 
Originally posted by acidosmosis
*shakes his head*...


SNGX1275.. you know, not everyone has the TIME to do a major search on large boards, and YES this is a decently large board. There is no law against reposts. Your going a little overboard with the whole "I have authority, quit the useless threads, search before you speak" deal...

Seriously, I mean, I *KNOW* this is going to get out of hand if we start getting all serious and annoying with "dont do this" "dont do that" "HEY! you didnt search first!"...

Also, you COULD just move this thread into the old one since you know where it is. That would seem a bit more logical.

Hold your horses acidosmosis, you may have some point there, however asking for direct answers rather than using the search feature is considered spoonfeeding. There can be some spoonfeeding but it should be kept to the minimum. I know you are matured person, I hope you understand the situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back