| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Cliff
Average Member
United States
501 Posts |
 Posted - 03 September 2003 : 18:39:52
|
I have an old PC at home running W2K and wanted to know if I would get any benefits from upgrading to XP Pro. I think I need the pro version because I connect via VPN to my work servers. I am not having any trouble now with W2K so I suppose "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", but I was curious if I was missing out on anything.
Current system
P866
512 MB RAM
10 GB hard drive |
|
|
Roland
Advanced Member
Netherlands
9335 Posts |
Posted - 03 September 2003 : 18:59:01
|
| I like some of XP's "new" features, like slideshows of pictures in a certain directory, and the smoother look and feel than that of Win2k. If my computer hadn't come with XP Home, I'd probably have gone for 2k rather than upgrading to XP Pro. But, now when I'm at work (using Win2k) I do miss some of the small improvements that XP has over 2k. Then again, I often get lots in the jumble of menus and submenus that XP has where things were easier to find in Win2k.... It's really double-sided. |
 |
|
|
Cliff
Average Member
United States
501 Posts |
Posted - 12 September 2003 : 10:32:59
|
| I've heard that XP can be a real system hog, will the system I listed run it well? |
|
|
|
Roland
Advanced Member
Netherlands
9335 Posts |
Posted - 12 September 2003 : 11:57:17
|
| it'll work since it meets the system requirements, but don't expect it to be too fast. |
|
|
|
Doug G
Support Moderator
USA
6493 Posts |
Posted - 12 September 2003 : 12:27:46
|
| W2K Pro and XP Pro are similar in system requirements and perform similarly in my experience. |
======
Doug G
======
Computer history and help at www.dougscode.com |
|
|
|
Davio
Development Team Member
Jamaica
12217 Posts |
Posted - 12 September 2003 : 12:28:06
|
| I'm on a Pentium 2.4 Ghz and it runs just fine. But a Pentium 866, that's old. But your memory is good though. I have 256 MB. |
Support Snitz Forums
|
|
|
|
ruirib
Snitz Forums Admin
Portugal
26364 Posts |
|
|
Nikkol
Forum Moderator
USA
6907 Posts |
Posted - 12 September 2003 : 16:38:08
|
Listen to you folks! P866 old. Ha... we still operate < P133 where I work. Granted, they barely handle Win98, but you take what you can get.
My home computer is P866 w/ 384MB RAM. It's a little slower at times than I would like, but XP pro does fine. |
Nikkol ~ Help Us Help You | ReadMe | 3.4.03 fixes | security fixes ~ |
|
|
|
Dave.
Senior Member
USA
1037 Posts |
Posted - 12 September 2003 : 19:35:26
|
| I've run Win2k and WinXP on an old 166mhz...128MB RAM, 2k will out-preform XP BY FAR...If you have 2k, my advice is to stay with it...The two operating systems are close in features and compatibility (Not sure why XP is slower...). |
|
|
|
ruirib
Snitz Forums Admin
Portugal
26364 Posts |
Posted - 12 September 2003 : 20:33:37
|
| XP will require a bit more memory than Win2K. I find 256 MB the very minimum required to run XP satisfactorily. Heck, with 128 MB not even Win2K runs that fast... |
Snitz 3.4 Readme | Like the support? Support Snitz too |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
