Should I upgrade from W2K to XP SP2?

  Tycho 19:48 24 Sep 2004

My rather aging cmputer boasts a 400MHz Pentium II and 384MB RAM. What would I gain from upgrading? What would I lose? Is XP Pro worth the extra?


  Tycho 19:58 24 Sep 2004

Hehehehe. I was delighted this afternoon to hear that the computer of a colleague at school has been shut down by MS. He has a pirated version of XP and installed the service pack...

What I say is "Serve him right!!"

  Diodorus Siculus 19:59 24 Sep 2004

Stick with Win2k - it is excellent.

XP will run ok on that spec, but just ok. A finely tuned 2k will be much better. To improve performance, disable any unnecessary startup services: see the blackadder site - click here

  Diodorus Siculus 20:04 24 Sep 2004

That is new to me - maybe MS is getting tough.

  Zaphod Beeblebrox 20:53 24 Sep 2004

i would stick with win 2k on that spec machine though XP will run on a 400 (I have tried it 256meg ram)
it was a painfull experience that swiftly sent me scurrying back for the 98se disk

  BBez 21:00 24 Sep 2004

no, keep 2000 on that spec, tried XP on my old Athlon TBird 1GHz and it ran like a bag-o-nails...

upgraded to XP2600 chip and 2000 ran like bag-o-nails but XP was a flyer...

As Zaphod Beeblebrox states, win 2000 can run really well if finely tuned (eg. unwanted services disabled etc) but XP is looking for at least an XP or P4 chip to obtain full benefits...

only my opinion...

  temp003 04:48 25 Sep 2004

Your computer specs are OK for XP Pro, but your machine should run slightly better under w2k Pro.

To me, what's more important is that there is very little to be gained from upgrading from w2k to XP SP2. There is very little that XP Pro can do which w2k pro can't. Remote Desktop is one (though w2k has its own older equivalent), limited CD burning capability, XP's Windows Media Player has slightly more features. SP2 provides better inbuilt wi-fi support, pop-up blocker, security warnings etc, but really nothing which you can't do without (and most of such features are probably provided by better third party software on your existing machine anyway).

I use w2k on my desktop and xp pro on my laptop (the laptop being a more recent purchase). I find xp pro really annoying. The so-called user-friendly features (prompts, balloon tips etc) really get in my way. The SP2 Security Centre is a real pain and I have just disabled it.

The popularity of XP has also increased w2k's compatibility. Partly because they use the same platform, driver support for w2k is now inevitably provided by manufacturers as well. MS security patches are also provided for w2k.

I think unless there are features in XP pro you particularly want, stick with w2k. I think it's the best OS, but that's my personal view.

  Tycho 08:26 25 Sep 2004

Many thanks to all. I will remain content with my W2K setup and save my money!


This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

AMD Radeon Adrenalin release date, new features, compatible graphics cards

Turn a photo into 16-bit pixel art

iMac Pro release date, UK price & specs

Comment suivre le parcours du père Noël ?