Vipercat on 29/7/2007 at 15:07
Another vote for windows 2000
New Horizon on 29/7/2007 at 15:33
What about Windows Server 2003? That's what I've been using as a desktop for a few years now, and it runs everything perfectly. XP felt like a clunky mess and ran much slower on my system than Server 2003.
DJ Riff on 4/8/2007 at 16:30
Quote:
As for Win2k being similar to XP... That makes no sense to me, not only are the schemes totally different, XP has better memory and disk management (amongst other things), which is why it gained the name "Windows XP" and not "Windows 2005."
WinXP is Also called Win2002.
And also Win2000 is named NT 5.0, WinXP - NT 5.1 and Vista is NT 6.0.
New Horizon on 4/8/2007 at 16:58
Quote Posted by DJ Riff
WinXP is Also called Win2002.
And also Win2000 is named NT 5.0, WinXP - NT 5.1 and Vista is NT 6.0.
Yup, xp is just windows 2000 on Steroids. Server 2003 was a different branch off of Windows 2000, but Vista used Server 2003 as it's development base. I found XP to be clunky compared to server 2003.
jay pettitt on 4/8/2007 at 18:55
Which makes you wonder how the hell they got Vista so terribly wrong.
EZ-52 on 4/8/2007 at 22:16
Vote for Windows Me.
(Don't start the jokes about it being a poor os)
Actually, it was 98se before I "upgraded"
june gloom on 4/8/2007 at 22:30
Quote Posted by EZ-52
(Don't start the jokes about it being a poor os)
those aren't jokes.
EZ-52 on 4/8/2007 at 22:35
Quote Posted by dethtoll
those aren't jokes.
True, but that was the kind of thing i was meaning. It's not that a bad os!
june gloom on 4/8/2007 at 22:57
yes it is.
Hit Deity on 5/8/2007 at 17:45
I hated ME. Kept crashing constantly. Thank God I only had it a short time when I got T2, because it kept crashing for me whenever I tried to play. WinXP only runs in software rendering mode for me, but it's better than crashing repeatedly I guess.
