Pumapeople: Xp And Windows 2000 - Pumapeople

Jump to content

Help

Page 1 of 1

You cannot start a new topic
You cannot reply to this topic

Xp And Windows 2000 Rate Topic:

#1 pumayok

Group: Members
Posts: 572
Joined: 25-February 07
Location:Worcestershire,Midlands

Posted 08 November 2007 - 05:56 PM

Can someone please tell me whats the difference between the two?

I need an operating system, its only really for a beginner just to really browse the net, so would windows 2000 be ok for this?

What limitations has it got?

Thanks guys x

#2 jonlanewilliams

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 12-October 07
Location:chorley ,lancs

Posted 08 November 2007 - 06:10 PM

QUOTE (pumayok @ Nov 8 2007, 05:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Go for Xp its easier for beginners,lots of operating systems on Ebay.
Make sure it has not been registered !

You could pick up 2000 for pennies though, depends on your level of knowledge and microsoft may not support it now (while since i used 2000)

#3 sky

Group: Members
Posts: 3711
Joined: 10-February 03
Location:Barry, South Wales

Posted 08 November 2007 - 06:57 PM

I would give Win2k an extremely wide berth!! XP Home is where you want to be looking - gazillions of drivers for all manner of devices...

If you fancy a laugh, you could look at Vista. Beware, it needs a *tidy* machine to run on. I run Vista Biz at home on a "nice" Athlon X2 system with 8Gig of ram and it (understandably) flies

Jason Aspinall, Original site creator, since '98
http://www.chilledatthebottom.com
http://www.chilled35.comMmm, clicky :)

#4 hotrodspike

Group: Members
Posts: 994
Joined: 25-February 07
Location:Bloxwich

Posted 08 November 2007 - 06:58 PM

I don't think Microsoft supports 2000 anymore whereas they still put out updates for XP. 2000 was only a bodged up version of '98 and ME was a total waste of time!

BOK is our co-pilot.

#5 sky

Group: Members
Posts: 3711
Joined: 10-February 03
Location:Barry, South Wales

Posted 08 November 2007 - 07:04 PM

I believe they don't either.. That said, I couldn't disagree with you more about Win2k... It was infinately more stable/userfriendly than NT4, and I'd never ever ever ever associate it with that PoS OS called "98" or "ME". Now, *they* were a total waste of time and money!

Jason Aspinall, Original site creator, since '98
http://www.chilledatthebottom.com
http://www.chilled35.comMmm, clicky :)

#6 hotrodspike

Group: Members
Posts: 994
Joined: 25-February 07
Location:Bloxwich

Posted 08 November 2007 - 07:10 PM

We had so much trouble with 2K at one place I worked at, that the management got an IT company in to uninstall it and reinstall 98 SE because it was so much more stable.

BOK is our co-pilot.

#7 rellik666

Group: Members
Posts: 807
Joined: 24-June 07
Location:Knott End-on-Sea, nr Blackpool

Posted 08 November 2007 - 07:17 PM

win2000 was fantastic, but only worked correctly on networks, i'm still running it on my server, dell 1800. Getting a dell 2600 in a month or so, and probably going to put it on that two!! Marmite springs to mind!! as far as me and 98 go, what a joke!!

This post has been edited by rellik666: 08 November 2007 - 07:17 PM

if at first you dont succeed parachuting's not your sport

Failure is not an option -- it comes bundled with Windows.

#8 Midnight Blue

Group: Members
Posts: 10748
Joined: 27-January 06
Location:North Suffolk

Posted 08 November 2007 - 07:29 PM

XP is very user friendly.

I stole BenF's Thunder ...

Pat

#9 Spleen

Group: Members
Posts: 1713
Joined: 01-April 05

Posted 08 November 2007 - 08:19 PM

Make sure you get a service pack 2 version, cause only XP SP2 supports automatic updates.

___________________________________
\_________________________________/

A Frying Pan..... c====\__________/
___________________________________
\_________________________________/

Thanks you Machine Head & Metallica for great nights in Sheffield and Manchester...