is it worth downgrading?

[waynejkruse10]

I am currently running Windows XP Pro on a 120gb HDD, AXP 2200+, 256mb Ram. Do you think its worth downgrading to Windows 2000 Pro? Xp seems to suck a lot of ram, and the only reason i like XP is the drivers and stability which Windows 2000 also has.

Any opinions?

Wayne

 

[southernlady]

Windows 2000 Pro
133 MHz or higher Pentium-compatible CPU.
Memory At least 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM; more memory generally improves responsiveness.
Hard Disk 2 GB with 650 MB free space.
Add SP4
340 MB in megabytes (MB)

Windows XP Pro
128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)
1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available hard disk space*
Add SP2
64 megabytes (MB) of RAM
1.8 GB of available hard disk space during installation

Now, I will tell you this cause we have access to both in this house, 2000 is stable but the graphics are not that great. It was NOT designed for a graphics environment. 98 and XP were. Also, when I was running a dual boot system, I could not run my resolution higher than 1024x768 even tho my monitor and graphics card both supported 1280x1024 (not that I go that high but I do use 1152x864). We never figured out why it wouldn't allow us to go higher but it wouldn't.

Also, something 2000 does that always drives me nuts, it does drag and drop really screwy when you put folders into new places. Say you want to copy a set of folders into My Documents? It scatters them all over creation! XP puts them nicely in order even if they aren't alphabetical right at first. And by scattered, I mean really scattered even to the point of being on top of one another.

It's just not as intuitive as XP.

My opinion, find a way to add another stick of memory. Liz

 

[waynejkruse10]

Fair enough, if i knew about 2000's crapola graphics i wouldnt even think about it. Thanks for the info, what i will do though is install windows 2000 on my p3 450 system, 2000 will suit it well.

Wayne

 

[CntdwnToExtn]

i like 2000 over xp.
xp seems to be waaaaaay to user friendly for me. and i don't like all that graphics it shows...like the icons and stuff, it looks like a damn mac o/s.

i've never had those problems thatthe other person has had though, maybe tha's why.

i love the o/s stability and how great networks run off of it.

 

[southernlady]

Actually, the networking on XP Pro works better than 2000 Pro...I had NO trouble setting up my network in XP but could not, for the life of me, figure out 2000!!! Had to have my husband do it. He had seen it done at work.

Have you run both on a side by side comparison? If you had you would see what I mean about the graphics. 2000 wasn't made for a graphics environment but a business ONLY environment. XP Pro handles both and does it very well.

Now 2000 is VERY stable, I will give it that. But it isn't for gamers or graphic artists. Liz

 

[waynejkruse10]

ok, ill take the advice onboard.

Thanks
Wayne

 

[EricB]

just add a 256mb stick and you will be fine. XP need a minium of 512 ram (I don't care what they say). you 450 processor will move almost as fast as 2000 processor (2/3 the speed maybe) if you have 512 ram to go with it

change your theme and appearance in xp to windows classics to free up even more ram.

 

[firestrike]

No point in downgrading IMO

 

[macdude425]

2000 is very stable, moreso than XP, which I've had crash *twice* on my machine. I got fed up so bad I just stopped using it.

Actually, the networking on XP Pro works better than 2000 Pro...I had NO trouble setting up my network in XP but could not, for the life of me, figure out 2000!!!

I've never had any problems with networking in 2000 Pro. But then again, I've used 2000 Pro forever.

 

[TheMajor]

Stick with XP. I used 2kPro for 1.5 years. XP is better.