I feel like i'm in the middle of a large river with two large boats on either side of me firing cannonballs back and forth....lol
So......what about Larry's original question? LOL....oh.....did you all forget about that?
Kidding
Larry, I haven't had any problems with 2000 SP4 either. As for upgrading....if you can help it, don't do it. Install XP fresh.
Now, I see some flaws in your statements, but I'd rather not attack you both and have you BOTH on my tail......lol
Instead, I will just state my opinion, and some fact. Windows XP was a dream before 2000 was invented. The concepts behind XP was to maintain a simple user balance, integrate a huge multimedia interface and add some administration options. The thought/dream behind this mix was Windows ME. Microsoft wished to have three OS types arrive on the market at the same time. Windows ME, Windows 2000 Pro and Windows 2000 Server. 2000 Pro and Server were for your obvious work envirnments and ME was for the (now XP) home user. ME obviously failed.....they wanted to integrate a Windows 98 OS and a Windows NT OS. They started from the 98 end and intensified the operating system on up.....and it failed miserably. But with XP.....since they waited a little while for ME to fail they realized that 2000 was a big success, so the went from the 2000 level and scaled it down. Since then XP has been a huge success. With only 2 products (Home and Pro) that are able to capture the Windows 98 world and the Windows 2000 world. This was the original intention. The XP OS wasn't meant for the workplace. It's original intention was for the home. But since scaling down 2000 to a XP Home OS, building an XP Pro just made sense.
XP didn't have a server line for obvious reasons. It was meant for release before Windows 2K. 2k server was already in the planning. By the time XP was released, W2k3 was well under development.
To be perfectly honest, XP runs better in certain fashions than 2000. But for the opposite, 2000 is sometimes better. All are built from the 2000 level.....so if Miocrosoft didn't believe in Windows 2000......XP would be TOTALLY different! I personally believe in 2000 over XP. I not only feel......but I KNOW that 2000 is a more mature OS than XP.
XP, is NOT a baby, but it doesn't handle certain ops better than 2000 does. I'm not going to leave you in the dark either....I'm actually going to TELL you the ops and services that 2000 runs more efficiently! RPC, IIS Client, QoS (for abvious reasons), Print Spooler and the Indexing Service. ESPECIALLY THE INDEXING SERVICE! Ever try a file search in W2K and XP? Time them and tell me the outcme. 2k will win every time....
Anyway, I thought that I'd shed my 2 cents.
-Mike