G
Guest
The Devil you know... or have experience with...
(fascinating thread so far)
(fascinating thread so far)
G
Guest
Yes, XP is superior to 2000 (in many ways, most of them internal to the
system).
Yet, the differences are often not enough for many people (parts of the
world) where 2000 is both new to them and just fine. A dilemma indeed, and
why support for Win 2000 has been extended and still is in doubt. Toss
Office in the mix (Office less, O2K, greater) and the sitiuation gets muddier.
I still have W2K/O2K (having used XP's, et al, elsewhere). I would prefer
the XP versions, but I still don't have a real reason to upgrade OS without
getting a new machine.
Did we ever hear from the original poster or the Aussie guy?
Cya Sparky..
Michael
system).
Yet, the differences are often not enough for many people (parts of the
world) where 2000 is both new to them and just fine. A dilemma indeed, and
why support for Win 2000 has been extended and still is in doubt. Toss
Office in the mix (Office less, O2K, greater) and the sitiuation gets muddier.
I still have W2K/O2K (having used XP's, et al, elsewhere). I would prefer
the XP versions, but I still don't have a real reason to upgrade OS without
getting a new machine.
Did we ever hear from the original poster or the Aussie guy?
Cya Sparky..
Michael
G
Guest
I noticed "they" attacked your knowledge (and age?, what's up with that?),
but not your experience. That is evident (especially when that Aussie spoke
early).
Any idea what the original poster is doing...? Noticed he abandoned ship...
TIme for football. Go Chargers.
Michael
but not your experience. That is evident (especially when that Aussie spoke
early).
Any idea what the original poster is doing...? Noticed he abandoned ship...
TIme for football. Go Chargers.
Michael
G
Guest
not to hard to imagine (but for no good reason).
You said it, XP & 2000 esentially are much the same (not just API's).
You said it, XP & 2000 esentially are much the same (not just API's).
C
Colon Terminus
Well BC ... just a quick note to express agreement with almost everything
you've said.
You're absolutely correct, FAT32 is by far the best choice for the O/S
partition.
Windows 2000 IS the superior O/S.
Keep up the good work.
I do have high hopes for Longhorn/Vista though.
For all of those "newer is always better" folks:
Remember Windows '98 First Edition?
Remember Windows ME?
you've said.
You're absolutely correct, FAT32 is by far the best choice for the O/S
partition.
Windows 2000 IS the superior O/S.
Keep up the good work.
I do have high hopes for Longhorn/Vista though.
For all of those "newer is always better" folks:
Remember Windows '98 First Edition?
Remember Windows ME?
K
Kevin Childers
Now Children Play Nice...
P
Paul Knudsen
If you ever need support, you'll need to have XP installed, I believe.
I suggest getting Partition Magic or the like and setting up a
dual-boot.
B
BC
Thanks.
Despite what other people here might think,
I'm not bashing XP just for the sake of
bashing Microsoft -- like everyone, I just
want things to work without there being a
lot of gotchas and hassles involved. I'd be
pretty happy if Microsoft did some some
serious soul-searching on Vista and decided,
"Let's learn from our mistakes and do it
right this time. We have the brains, the
resources and our pride -- let's do it!"
Wishful thinking?
-BC
Despite what other people here might think,
I'm not bashing XP just for the sake of
bashing Microsoft -- like everyone, I just
want things to work without there being a
lot of gotchas and hassles involved. I'd be
pretty happy if Microsoft did some some
serious soul-searching on Vista and decided,
"Let's learn from our mistakes and do it
right this time. We have the brains, the
resources and our pride -- let's do it!"
Wishful thinking?
-BC
H
hdrdtd
I think you'll find that everybody has their own favorite version of Windows
for their own reasons.
Some people will choose 98SE as being among the most stable version of
windows with the least hardware requirements for their needs,
Some people prefer Windows 2k, and some will prefer Windows XP. each has
their own reasons for their choice.
The corporate enviornment I work in currently has probably close to 200 PC's
all of various ages and flavors of windows.
Believe it or not, we stll have some laptops that we use for data acquestion
that dual-boot DOS and Windows 95.
the other systems run everything from Win98 to NT to Win2k, and XP.
For what we use the PC's for, If I had to choose, I'd say overall, Win2K has
been the most stable platform for us.
If you feel most comfortable with Win2k, then go for it.
If you're concerned about the legality of installing Win2K on your system,
from what I was told by Microsoft a few years ago (things may have changed).
If it's an OEM license, then the product is legally tied to that one PC it
came on. It cannot be transferred to another system. If the PC dies, the
license dies with it. (boy does that suck).
If it's a retail license, then you can legally transfer the product to
another PC as long as it's completely removed from the first PC.
Also, if it's a retail product, all the previous versions of that same
product are Grandfathered into the license. That is to say, if you bought
the current retail version of a Microsoft product, you have the legal right
to use that version or any other previous version of that same prouct. This
comes in handy when a company perhaps has a whole slew of PC's running a
particular version of a Microsoft product, (just for example Microsoft
Project) but then they get another PC Microsoft only sells a newer version.
As long as you buy a legal copy of the newer version, you're allowed to
install the older version.
for their own reasons.
Some people will choose 98SE as being among the most stable version of
windows with the least hardware requirements for their needs,
Some people prefer Windows 2k, and some will prefer Windows XP. each has
their own reasons for their choice.
The corporate enviornment I work in currently has probably close to 200 PC's
all of various ages and flavors of windows.
Believe it or not, we stll have some laptops that we use for data acquestion
that dual-boot DOS and Windows 95.
the other systems run everything from Win98 to NT to Win2k, and XP.
For what we use the PC's for, If I had to choose, I'd say overall, Win2K has
been the most stable platform for us.
If you feel most comfortable with Win2k, then go for it.
If you're concerned about the legality of installing Win2K on your system,
from what I was told by Microsoft a few years ago (things may have changed).
If it's an OEM license, then the product is legally tied to that one PC it
came on. It cannot be transferred to another system. If the PC dies, the
license dies with it. (boy does that suck).
If it's a retail license, then you can legally transfer the product to
another PC as long as it's completely removed from the first PC.
Also, if it's a retail product, all the previous versions of that same
product are Grandfathered into the license. That is to say, if you bought
the current retail version of a Microsoft product, you have the legal right
to use that version or any other previous version of that same prouct. This
comes in handy when a company perhaps has a whole slew of PC's running a
particular version of a Microsoft product, (just for example Microsoft
Project) but then they get another PC Microsoft only sells a newer version.
As long as you buy a legal copy of the newer version, you're allowed to
install the older version.
B
BC
My understanding of the licensing is a bit different: if you
have XP Home, you can't use its license to legally install
any prior version of Windows in place of it. If you have XP
Pro, though, its license does allow you to do so to Win2k,
NT, and 98SE. This is a shortcut to Microsoft's "downgrade
chart" in Word format: http://tinyurl.com/bwy6m
And this is the pertinent excerpt:
OEM Downgrade Rights for desktop operating systems apply
to Windows XP Professional only. Please note, OEM
downgrade versions of Windows XP Professional are limited
to Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional, Microsoft Windows
NT Workstation 4.0, and Microsoft Windows 98 (Second
Edition)
The rest of the document is pretty murky, to say the least.
-BC
have XP Home, you can't use its license to legally install
any prior version of Windows in place of it. If you have XP
Pro, though, its license does allow you to do so to Win2k,
NT, and 98SE. This is a shortcut to Microsoft's "downgrade
chart" in Word format: http://tinyurl.com/bwy6m
And this is the pertinent excerpt:
OEM Downgrade Rights for desktop operating systems apply
to Windows XP Professional only. Please note, OEM
downgrade versions of Windows XP Professional are limited
to Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional, Microsoft Windows
NT Workstation 4.0, and Microsoft Windows 98 (Second
Edition)
The rest of the document is pretty murky, to say the least.
-BC
G
Guest
Richard Urban said:
The W2K install fails when part one of the install completes, the PC will
not reboot.
Paticulars are
Pentium III
512 Meg
120 gig drive
S
Sparky Spartacus
Tom said:
Harry Kerry?
Not going there --- just not going there.
G
Guest
I am using inspiron 700m notebook. I reinstall Win XP with the Win XP CD from
Dell. It is not a recovery disk, so need to install as we normally do. Don't
require to input the product ket. It is automatically activated.
Dell. It is not a recovery disk, so need to install as we normally do. Don't
require to input the product ket. It is automatically activated.