Windows 2000 vs XP Pro

[Dev]

Define lame.

Granted XP boot faster but it sure as hell isn't anymore efficient or better at memory management or faster than W2K.

I could live with all the annoying "features" MS included in XP if it was in fact faster/better/more stable than W2K but it simply isn't.

Don't buy the MS hype, err wait nm you already did.

/dev

[rustyf50]

Its not hype. XP pro is a awsome OS and I like it better then MS 2000 which i am using right now. thats My opinion.

[seteo-bloke]

I also run both W2K and XP Pro at work and, with the extra's turned off on XP, it does run maginally faster than W2K & it's more stable...plus it handles legacy apps much better.

You use what works for you under different circumstances.

My personal preference: Win. XP.

[sectionthirty1]

Asking which is better between win2000 and win2k is like asking which is better, the north tower from the wtc or the south....they are both huge and crash... Someone told me that joke yesterday...

I'd go with WinXP dude...no probs here with winXP