2000 vs XP - Advice needed :-)

vbimport

#1

I’ve been and I still am a very enthusiastic user of good old Windows98SE; however, due to a number of practical issues I’m now considering to install a more recent OS (maybe in dual-boot with 98SE, if possible).

I need some practical advice from MS OS knowledgeable/veteran users here, as I’m deciding between 2000 Pro and XP Pro.

Here are my priorities:

1 - Maximum compatibility. To be able to run as many different games and apps as possible, both new and old, not only PC but also including Amiga and ZX Spectrum emulators and stuff such as MAME. Driver support is naturally also good.

2 - Maximum performance. I’m the kind of guy who disables window and menu animations in the OS if that means 0,001% more speed and free memory. I don’t use a PC to run OSes, I use it to run games and apps and the OS isn’t, and shouldn’t ever be, but a mere tool to accomplish that goal. As such, it must be as lightweight and transparent as possible and use memory and resources efficiently (i.e. leave them for the said games and apps as opposed to steal them for itself).

3 - Maximum privacy and OS obedience. I don’t like ratware and I don’t like OSes with “self-initiative”. As stated, the OS is a mere tool. As such, it must obey me at all times. If I say disable this, the OS must disable it. If I say do this this way, the OS must do it that exact way. If I say I don’t want my personal information being sent to obscure corporate scum, I mean it. Probably everyone who can help me with this topic knows what I’m talking about, possibly even better than myself.

Let that much needed advice come. :slight_smile:


#2

For me u shoud instal XP …

  • XP got better performance at Games (3d)
  • i think better “compatibility” … but it depends …
  • u can always use NitrousXP/GaimGain to have better performance whole Os and Apps

I’m simular user … i am using Win XP (pro) … i was changing Os From Win 98 to current (about 14 months :S)

instal win XP Pro SP2


#3

WinXP is based on Win2k, but has a better multimedia support.
On my home PC I use Win2k, as I bought that years ago and still works for me. However, there are times when I wonder if WinXP would give me a better support for certain multimedia (for example: I have never been able to get the most out of my Matrox Marvel G400, as it is not fully supported in Win2K).

I am not very technical, but I’d say that you are now better off with WinXP.


#4

XP does use more overhead for it’s gui. HOWEVER, you can turn the default gui off and use “classic”, which is more like 2000/98, which will be more familiar, and use less resources which will appeal to you.
I agree, I like my OS to do as I say. Depending on your hardware specs, I would go for XP pro, with all the pretty stuff off, which will still let you keep XP’s power features.


#5

Out of 2000 and XP, XP is better for gamming

\\VH////
:slight_smile:


#6

Xp


#7

Those statements caught my eye, could you guys elaborate a bit on them ? Do you actually mean that the same game will run at a higher framerate on XP than 2000 ? Why ? Thanks again. :slight_smile:


#8

win 2000 = server
win XP = desktop

i think … dont know realy why … but from test … XP is better for gaming ;S


#9

XP has compatibility setting where 2000 does not. you will have probs running DOS/9x games on 2000. More and more games are being coded to work better with XP. If you look on the back of most games it says XP.

\\VH////
:slight_smile:


#10

Yo-

Have tried both - prefer XP - especially Home version-

Mike


#11

Thank you everyone. After some reading there seems to be a consensus about XP being a bit more retro-compatible than 2000, and that being my top priority I guess I’ll have to give it a shot. It’s also good to know that I’ll be able to improve performance a bit by stripping down unnecessary GUI elements.

BTW, what’s that cheese about SP1 vs SP2 ? From what I read SP2 offers relevant security improvements but slows down things generally. Since I don’t use IE to begin with, maybe I’d be better off with SP1 ? Opinions ?


#12

Sp1


#13

SP1 (faster)
SP2 (secure)

Generaly SP2 5-10% less performance on duron 700@840 MHz 256 DDR, so if u got P4/Athlon 2GHz+ … u wont see big diffrence (but more secure), i tested SP1 and SP2 on Athlon XP 3200+ 64^ 1GHz Ram (using Win XP 32^) … i didnt see difrence CPU usage … when i burning 16x about 20%- :S


#14

I would recommend XP Pro SP2. If you are going to buy a new XP, you will get SP2 anyway.

If you have a copy of an old XP Pro (non SP1/2) the recommended way to install is by going straight to SP2 first (without installing SP1), then you can install other softwares afterwards.


#15

So you don’t have to install SP1 frist, then SP2, thats what i’ve done on reinstallations,

cheers


#16

If u got old CD Win XP (non SP1/SP2) better create Instalation CD whit SP1 / SP2 whit Autostreamer^

How To

Download


#17

The way I do it:
Install XP > Install SP2! SP2 contains alot of the fixes SP1 does.

\\VH////
:slight_smile:


#18

generaly i think SP2 (include all SP1 fix’s)
I propose … autostreamer … u wont need to instal SP … after instal WinXP
(read >> no sh…ty backup files in system Direcory, and unneeded reg writes)


#19

THanks besmirch, I’ll try that.


#20

I tried the Autostreamer, works like a charm. Now my WinXP Pro CD is WinXP Pro SP2. Thanks again besmirch! Now I’m studying to make the unattended XP CD. Don’t know if it’s worth.