XP Home edition is somewhat bearable but it's still overloaded compared to 2000 Pro IMO (had a friend pester me to install XP Pro despite recommending Home, because he said it was more stable. XP is pretty, heavy, and has lots of stuff you probably will never use. Windows 2000 has a smaller footprint, very stable, and doesn't have a bunch of security holes with needless stuff stacked on top it just gets to the point. I don't think it's good for anything now days BTW. Speaking with my own opinion so bear with me (and yes I prefer to install what I need and only what I like). So if you want less work trying to get XP only games to work then go with XP.Īctivation was solved long ago so that isn't a issue and shouldn't stop you from using XP. If you check my compatibility list you'll see that the "just works" games outnumber 2000 but the "games with problems" are higher for 2000. XP patches have been backported to 2000 by the community and are still ongoing but XP is more secure since at least some patches will be offered for that OS until 2019 and any patches backported to 2000 will take awhile. (not fugly like XP)Ĭompatibility is pretty much the same except for the past couple of years devs have dropped 2000 support you'll need to use API wrappers to run XP programs and games. Use DOSBox but if CPU is too slow then use NTVDM with vdmsound\Virtual PC\Vmware, etc and/or dual-boot with DOS.īetter user interface. Reply 2 of 31, by DosFreakĭriver issues if hardware is not compatible with 2000.Ĭompatible with most windows games except for some 9x games which are incompatible. I've already done this for Office 2003, but XP requires so much more.Īt some point, I'm sure either MS or somebody else will come up with a way around activation if they should ever discontinue that service. I've got three upcoming XP builds I need to do and I intend to use them as examples for which updates are needed. My advice: Start making notes of which patches you need for XP and start saving copies now. That version requires a key, but does not require activation.) (Note: If you can find an Enterprise/Corporate version of XP, that would be best. Otherwise, in all ways XP is the superior OS. That is the only advantage I can see over WinXP. You see, there is a very easy way to install Win2K without a key and it also does not require activation. After that, I can see why somebody might choose Win2K over XP. For example, I think MS is dropping ALL support for XP in June of next year. There may come a time when Win2K might make for an easier build vs WinXP. It essentially is Win2K with some improvements. Also, XP is really just a minor upgrade from Win2K.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |