|
|
|
|
Thread title: Why Windows 2000 is better than Windows XP ? |
|
|
|
|
|
Thread tools
Search this thread
Display Modes
|
|
07-18-2006, 09:07 PM
|
#1
|
Status: OG
Join date: Apr 2006
Location: California
Expertise: Design, Music, Xhtml, Css
Software: Photoshop, Coda, FL Studio
Posts: 2,007
|
Befor i bought my current computer, we used to run an old laptp with 2k pro.
|
|
02-01-2007, 09:58 PM
|
#2
|
Status: Junior Member
Join date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Expertise:
Software:
Posts: 31
|
I agree totally.
I look after around 200 pc's at work; about 60% Win 2k, 20% XP and 20% Win98 (yes 98, i can hear you laughing you know...). I get most problems with XP users with programs crashing and general slowness of the machines. The Win 98 machines are...well, need i say more....and the Win 2k machines are rock solid.
There's too much fanciness with XP and especially with the introduction of Vista, for use in business, even with all visual settings turned down.
The majority of business workers don't need all the extras; as long as they can get their mails and do whatever it is they do, who needs fancy looking transparent windows and pretty buttons?
Bring back windows for workgroups
|
|
03-16-2007, 04:48 PM
|
#3
|
Status: I'm new around here
Join date: Dec 2005
Location: Gloucester
Expertise:
Software:
Posts: 15
|
Windows 2000 Vs XP
I agree but Windows 2000 does lack the LDAP Active Directory Service which I have found to be required with a lot of bluechip organisations.
|
|
07-18-2006, 10:58 PM
|
#4
|
Status: Custom User Title
Join date: Apr 2005
Location:
Expertise:
Software:
Posts: 2,297
|
Do you think he will be able to tell you himself if he's banned? Heh.
I think it was an issue with him advertising his personal site in all of his posts, but there might be another reason I am unaware of.
|
|
07-20-2006, 05:00 PM
|
#5
|
Status: Senior Member
Join date: Dec 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Expertise:
Software:
Posts: 870
|
I don't know if this why but he should have been banned for ripping articles, like this one.
Quite interesting but XP is better for networking and security (although it's rumoured SP2 will be available for previous windows versions soon).
|
|
03-16-2007, 08:46 PM
|
#6
|
Status: Dediport Hosting
Join date: Jul 2006
Location: Berkshire
Expertise: programming, business
Software: Dreamweaver
Posts: 1,316
|
Possibly not, maybe he did something else they did say he had been producing quality articles so you never know.
|
|
03-17-2007, 12:48 PM
|
#7
|
Status: Sin Binner
Join date: Mar 2007
Location:
Expertise:
Software:
Posts: 70
|
Sorry, but I'm with XP, windows 2000 is just to.. um hmm
ugly?
|
|
03-18-2007, 07:20 AM
|
#8
|
Status: Request a custom title
Join date: May 2006
Location: Memphis, TN
Expertise: Fedex Marketing Director.
Software: Firefox.
Posts: 2,632
|
Im sorry but performance overcomes "ugly" I would use windows 2000 pro before any and i mean any os system.
|
|
03-18-2007, 01:59 PM
|
#9
|
Status: Geek
Join date: Apr 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Expertise: Software
Software: Chrome, Notepad++
Posts: 6,894
|
Im not a huge fan of windows 2000, XP runs fine on my good processor. And if price is the reason, linux is cheaper....
|
|
03-20-2007, 04:14 AM
|
#10
|
Status: Request a custom title
Join date: May 2006
Location: Memphis, TN
Expertise: Fedex Marketing Director.
Software: Firefox.
Posts: 2,632
|
tbh ive never tried linux but im kinda interested in it. I wouldnt mind giving it a try legal of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
|