1. You are viewing our forum as a guest. For full access please Register. WindowsBBS.com is completely free, paid for by advertisers and donations.

is windows 2000 useless?

Discussion in 'Legacy Windows' started by greenday5494, 2007/06/15.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 2007/06/15
    greenday5494

    greenday5494 Inactive Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2007/06/14
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    0
    is win2k useless? is it too out-dated and to un-supported? also, is Win2k more stable that winXP?
     
  2. 2007/06/15
    Arie

    Arie Administrator Administrator Staff

    Joined:
    2001/12/27
    Messages:
    15,174
    Likes Received:
    412
    Yes, Yes and No.
     
    Arie,
    #2

  3. to hide this advert.

  4. 2007/06/16
    visionof

    visionof Inactive

    Joined:
    2006/11/12
    Messages:
    778
    Likes Received:
    5
    Is the world coming to an end ????

    People buy computers to run programs.
    They don't to run operating systems ( usually).
    Windows 2000 was the precursor of XO ( came from separate NT stream than the 95/98/Me run)
    The limitation of 2000 was that it was not that well supported with drivers at the time.
    Many of the xp drivers are /2000 drivers.
    Plus many seem to be available now.
    XP does have an advantage of having a very large catalogue of drivers ( for hardware around when xp was developed not newer motherboards , wireless etc)
    The usual rule of thumb is that the newer the OS the more demanding and hardware intensive it was.
    2000 can run on less powerfull computers than xp by far.
    You may see or hear of computers such as Pentium 2s that run XP.
    This is a sales trick ( I got a powerfull XP computer like the one at Best Buy for $ 100). These are loaded up with ram. Sort of like the camel that died a day after being bought or traded for)
    They do run base xp . Add anything ele - antivirus for example and the system grinds to halt.
    In a situation of a less powerful computer 2000 can be a better choice.
    Most things that are now demanding xp ( say skype) if you read the small print will also work with 2000 with service pack 4.
    Newer computers though , (Pentium 4 range) seem to be optimized for XP and my anectdotal suprising experience has been that they seem to run faster on xp than 2000.
    By the way the new vista has a very limited driver catalogue. We were spoiled by XP.
     
  5. 2007/06/16
    greenday5494

    greenday5494 Inactive Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2007/06/14
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    0
    huh, i always thought win2k was more stable, cuz winXP was a hybrid of NT and win9x. nice, nostigic things i like to do on these boards.
     
  6. 2007/06/16
    Whiskeyman Lifetime Subscription

    Whiskeyman Inactive Alumni

    Joined:
    2005/09/10
    Messages:
    1,772
    Likes Received:
    37
    Where do you come up with your false notions of the Windows operating systems?
     
  7. 2007/06/16
    greenday5494

    greenday5494 Inactive Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2007/06/14
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    0
    no idea
     
  8. 2007/06/19
    visionof

    visionof Inactive

    Joined:
    2006/11/12
    Messages:
    778
    Likes Received:
    5
    seems to be a misinformed person intent on insulting a computer operating system.
    Must have a very high sense of intrinsic self worth.
    Similar to a person who curses telephone answering machines.
     
  9. 2007/07/08
    greenday5494

    greenday5494 Inactive Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2007/06/14
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    0
    uh ***? i was asking a question dude. i wasnt insulting a freakin OS...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.