Which OS?

[Draven]

i am prepping my pc for a reload as windows has gone a little screwy of late and i loaded it in a hurry last time

i have the following OS's available to me:

1. Windows 2000 pro
2. Windows XP pro
3. Windows 2000 server
4. Windows Server 2003

which one should i go for
no faffing about with blah not so good for games blah as i have never had a problem running games on 2000 pro or server

[Nicely]

Using it for what primarily? How old is the PC?

[Draven]

its my home pc used for pretty much everything as a home pc, games, films, music, surfing etc etc

its an athlon xp 2400+, 512 crucial ddr, 2x 80gb maxtors, geforce fx 5950 ultra

[Sibbers]

Athlon XP ??? Go with Windows 2000, it'll be the fastest OS out of those listed for that PC... Windows XP is better if you have hyperthreading etc, but otherwise 2000 has less other processes running in the background.

[Nicely]

I would personally go with XP for that spec. Although XP is about to have a complete overhaul when SP2 is fully released.

[Kuddy]

Don't go for the server software, a lot of programs won't run on it.
XP will be fine. A little slower than 2000 but a zillion times more stable.

[Draven]

thing is 2000 server can be a lot faster than pro when run as a client without the extra server services running, i've seen it in benchmarks previously
once gained me around 900 3d mark points !!

[Kuddy]

you can get shut of a lot of the XP services though. Take a look here at BlackViper's site:

http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm

[amnesia]

Have a dual boot machine... XP for playing games, LINUX for everything else.

The penguin WILL be victorious.

:thumbs:

[Kuddy]

:rolleyes:

http://www.sxoc.com/vbb/attachment.php?attachmentid=10781&stc=1

[Draven]

Have a dual boot machine... XP for playing games, LINUX for everything else.

The penguin WILL be victorious.

:thumbs:
definitely dont want to go dual boot, waste of precious hard disk space

cant be faffing around learning penguin OS at the mo anyway

[Sibbers]

If you stop all the bloatware running on XP its probably a better bet. Depends what you want really... if you're fully into getting the fastest out of your system I would say 2000 pro is the way to go, but XP is what everyone supports so its generally more stable and trouble free. Depends how geeky you are really. Linux is 100% mega geek though - would be nice if people supported it and it was more useable.

[amnesia]

definitely dont want to go dual boot, waste of precious hard disk space

cant be faffing around learning penguin OS at the mo anyway


What's precious about hard disk space ?
160Gb hard disks are about £80 !

Take your point about learning LINUX - it's a bit of a fag until you get used to having to do things for yourself instead of letting Fisher Price Windows do it for you :p

[Sibbers]

What's precious about hard disk space ?
160Gb hard disks are about £80 !

Take your point about learning LINUX - it's a bit of a fag until you get used to having to do things for yourself instead of letting Fisher Price Windows do it for you :p

Shame there's no happy medium. Windows takes the control away from the user while Linux forces it on the user... why can't they meet in the middle and give the user the choice ???

[SFC]

Shame there's no happy medium. Mac OS takes the control away from the user while Linux forces it on the user... why can't they meet in the middle and give the user the choice like Windows does???

:D

XP Pro and switch off all the muppet features.

[mattpayne]

:rolleyes:

http://www.sxoc.com/vbb/attachment.php?attachmentid=10781&stc=1


thats quality... :D

id go for winXP pro and a session at blackvipers site...

as for server software... i have 2003 running on a PII333 and its LOTS faster than win2000 server on the same hardware :)

[gaz.thomas]

Shame there's no happy medium. Windows takes the control away from the user while Linux forces it on the user... why can't they meet in the middle and give the user the choice ???

I'd say windows xp was the happy-medium between MacOS (Oi - don't touch that - you're a user - let apple take care of *everything*...) and Linux(The operating system for people who have too much time on their hands) :D

It's by no means perfect but it is the least hassle to live with and is worth it for the reduced 'compatibility issues' alone. At least until service pack 2 breaks everything ;)

Gaz
-x-

[Sibbers]

:D

XP Pro and switch off all the muppet features.

I spent a while scratching my head at that one !!! LOL :wack:

EDIT - heheh looks like Gaz fell for it too !!

(check my post and then the quote dude) :p :cool:

[Draven]

its looking a bit xp pro-ish at the mo then
little bit concerned tho as i have never previously found xp to be as stable as 2000

[Sibbers]

Dude, if I had an athlon there's no way I'd put XP on my system but it's what most people like. I have to because 2000 won't support my hyper-threading but I'd much rather have 2000 with HT support.

If you prefer 2000 and your happy to tweak/manipualte your system then do it :thumbs:

[Infinity]

Personally I'd go for Windows 2000 Pro :nod:

I've found it to be more stable than XP Pro...

Jut

[Draven]

finished transferring all me crap off of it (20gb's worth to keep) and burned cd's of all the *other* stuff

think i'm gonna go against the voters on this one and stick with good ol' 2000 pro for another rebuild, may see what xp sp2 is like for the next time (wonderful 6 monthly reloads)

right, time to get cracking

[ScoobyDoo]

I agree, XP Pro, muppet features off, useless services stopped and Services pack 2 :thumbs:

Id never use linux for home machine, too restrictive :no:

[Exactly]

I have just rebuilt my 2 PCs following this guys "Tweak" guide and "the correct way to install XP" article, does all the stuff the guys above suggest. I don't agree with everything this guy says but is a good guide overall...

http://www.tweakhound.com/

Tim

[Dave_S]

It appears Blackviper doesn't know how to set the permissions on his server :D

Dave