Operating System - 2000 or XP

[Cole]

Did you keep XP on the original system?

The theory goes.....If connected and XP is installed on the other system then the second system will not activate because it will detect that the key is in use on another system, thus prompting a new key and license.

However, if the other system has been deactivated, then all you did is transfer the license that you have which is legal and ok.

No, I wiped it but I did have leave it for about a month. However, I didn't go on line with the old XP as I was using the Win 2000 on a different hard drive by this time. I kept the old xp for a while as I was able to link to a few programs in the XP partition from the Win 2000 partition, but eventually wiped it when I decided to move fully over to Win 2000 on that PC.

As others have said, Win2K and WinXP are excellent operating systems and both are very stable.

My preference would be for WinXP... simply, in my experience, it is as stable as Windows 2K, it has better driver support, and you can turn off the trimmings to make it Win2K-ish if you like.

And simply, some of the GUI extensions in WinXP are useful (e.g., image thumbnails).

Seems staying with XP would be the way to go, but I may have Win 2000 on as a backup as occasionally (but rare) for some reason XP doesn't recognise my Canopus ADVC-50. As previously stated, it will make my mind up one way or another.

Thanks to everyone for the advice.

[bazooka]

@Cole

I can't tell you what to do.

All I can do is advise you, but what I would do is look for a updated driver and stick with XP.

There is not going to be a service pack 5 for 2000 and support for 2000 is starting to end.

In the end, it is your call.

I support whatever you do.

[Cole]

All I can do is advise you, but what I would do is look for a updated driver and stick with XP.

There is not going to be a service pack 5 for 2000 and support for 2000 is starting to end.

In the end, it is your call.

I support whatever you do.

I think that you are right and I should stick with XP for my video/music editing PC.

Thanks for the advice and support.

[bazooka]

Thanks for the advice and support.

No problem

[Capmaster]

All I can do is advise you, but what I would do is look for a updated driver and stick with XP.

There is not going to be a service pack 5 for 2000 and support for 2000 is starting to end.

In the end, it is your call.

I support whatever you do.

I think that you are right and I should stick with XP for my video/music editing PC.

Thanks for the advice and support.

Probably wise. I still think 2000 has a slight edge in the stability area, but XP is pretty darn good too. The key is the NT core, and getting away from 16-bit/pseudo-32-bit semi-DOS code that the "consumer" OS-es were prior to XP

[Garibaldi]

I personally have XP home on my machine. IMO it works fine for basic video-editing applications like capturing, dvd authoring, and burning. I also have Slackware Linux installed, and I try to do all if not most of it on there because I can just get the video all ready to render and then drop down to a very basic window manager like Fluxbox and render my file, which makes it go quicker.

[lordsmurf]

Probably wise. I still think 2000 has a slight edge in the stability area, but XP is pretty darn good too. The key is the NT core, and getting away from 16-bit/pseudo-32-bit semi-DOS code that the "consumer" OS-es were prior to XP

Only XP Pro is all NT code. XP Home still has junk in it.

[bazooka]

I like the encrypting file system feature of XP.

It is awesome.

That was not in 2000.

[handyguy]

The OP wanted it for video work, so I would make sure to run compatibility checkers for each to see what is supported.

[NightWing]

One item. If you do W2k install SP4 for it!

W2k SP5 will be a wrap up patch some time next year.

Run systems here with W2k-SP4 and XP-SP2. Both work well.

[bazooka]

[quote="NightWing"]W2k SP5 will be a wrap up patch some time next year.

There will not be a SP5.

There will be an update rollup that consists of updates that have already been released.

[disturbed1]

Windows 2000, all the way. With XP, by the time you disable all the non needed backgroud process, turn off the ugly eye candy, you have......Windows 2000

What's all this about driver support? I have 5 machines with 2000, and 0 driver issues. Perhaps I'm just lucky, don't know. All of my capture, sound, video, and network cards work just fine.

There is some software that does require Windows XP, unless you have to use this software (Avid, DVD Producer, DVDit! 5), there isn't really a reason to use XP.

IMO, Windows 2000 = work, Windows XP = Play.

[bazooka]

Windows 2000, all the way. With XP, by the time you disable all the non needed backgroud process, turn off the ugly eye candy, you have......Windows 2000

What's all this about driver support? I have 5 machines with 2000, and 0 driver issues. Perhaps I'm just lucky, don't know. All of my capture, sound, video, and network cards work just fine.

There is some software that does require Windows XP, unless you have to use this software (Avid, DVD Producer, DVDit! 5), there isn't really a reason to use XP.

IMO, Windows 2000 = work, Windows XP = Play.

Other than the fact that 2000 will soon be a security risk.

XP = work as well.

That is why they have xp pro.

[sacajaweeda]

Your much better off with XP PRO then 2000 as 2000 was never designed as a home operating sys. There is not the driver support for 2000 . If you are going to go with 2000 make sure you have all the drivers you will need before you install it .

Yes of course it's completely subjective. The noobs and computer illiterate types will do good to stay away from Windows 2000.

On the other hand, if you actually know what you're doing, Windows 2000 is just fine.

And on the OTHER other hand (is that three hands now?) people who REALLY know what they are doing won't even **** up their PC by installing any flavor of Windows on it.

There's nothing wrong with the Windows 2000 OS though.

Like usual, the PEBKAC.

HTH

[sacajaweeda]

What's all this about driver support? I have 5 machines with 2000, and 0 driver issues. Perhaps I'm just lucky, don't know. All of my capture, sound, video, and network cards work just fine.

The driver support argument is a bit of a red herring, IMO. My current process of producing a DVD from start to finish - capturing from cable box, trimming, editing, encoding, authoring & burning - can all be done on a PC with a virgin install of Windows 2000 and no network connection. Not one service pack or driver update needed to do what I do. If it's not on the driver CD that came with my hardware or already in 2000's database, I do not need it.

When and if my current process changes and this is no longer possible with Windows 2000, then maybe I'll upgrade. I'm rather content with my current procedure, so I don't forsee an upgrade anytime soon.

[bazooka]

Yes of course it's completely subjective. The noobs and computer illiterate types will do good to stay away from Windows 2000.

On the other hand, if you actually know what you're doing, Windows 2000 is just fine.

And on the OTHER other hand (is that three hands now?) people who REALLY know what they are doing won't even **** up their PC by installing any flavor of Windows on it.

There's nothing wrong with the Windows 2000 OS though.

Like usual, the PEBKAC.

HTH

What is your point?

I am a network admin and I use XP.

I also use Fedora Core 3 Linux for administration duties.

[budz]

i find it odd that microsoft will end their support for windows 2000 because if i'm not mistaken they extended their support for windows 98 and ME. i'll upgrade when i'm forced to because everything works perfectly fine with windows 2000 pro. my printers, scanner and canopus advc-100 works perfectly fine. i know there's a bug when using xp pro for the canopus advc-100. i have no driver issues with any of my computer components.

[bazooka]

The driver support argument is a bit of a red herring, IMO. My current

Dude, XP does have better driver support.

Please quit trying to start something.

You just said that XP users are morons.

I am an XP user and I am not a moron.

[sacajaweeda]

What is your point?

I am a network admin and I use XP.

I also use Fedora Core 3 Linux for administration duties.

My point is simply that regardless of how much you think you might know, and whatever internet credentials you may care to wave in all of your blustering, you still don't have any clue as to what is best for me and my particular application, or my personal preference.

There's nothing wrong with my setup and none of your XP fanboyism and blustering is going to change that.

Regards,

[sacajaweeda]

You just said that XP users are morons.

No, you pretty much just made that completely up.

I am an XP user and I am not a moron.

I'm willing to take your word on that, if it really means that much to you.

[bazooka]

What is your point?

I am a network admin and I use XP.

I also use Fedora Core 3 Linux for administration duties.

My point is simply that regardless of how much you think you might know, and whatever internet credentials you may care to wave in all of your blustering, you still don't have any clue as to what is best for me and my particular application, or my personal preference.

There's nothing wrong with my setup and none of your XP fanboyism and blustering is going to change that.

Regards,

I never said I know what is best for you.

But you crossed the line when you said computer illiteralte and newbies would use XP over 2000.

[bazooka]

There's nothing wrong with my setup and none of your XP fanboyism and blustering is going to change that.

Regards,

Again, I did not say there was anything wrong with your setup, and you are trying to instigate a argument by insulting not only me but also other knowledgeable people that use XP.

I am not a fanboy.

The noobs and computer illiterate types will do good to stay away from Windows 2000.

On the other hand, if you actually know what you're doing, Windows 2000 is just fine.

And on the OTHER other hand (is that three hands now?) people who REALLY know what they are doing won't even **** up their PC by installing any flavor of Windows

Those were your words...so stop lying.

[sacajaweeda]

But you crossed the line when you said computer illiteralte and newbies would use XP over 2000.

I didn't say that, either. Stop making things up. I simply stated that they would do well to stay away from it. And that isn't a slam on anybody or any OS. Windows 2000 isn't as user friendly as XP. I fully concede that 'point'.

[sacajaweeda]

I'll be the bigger man here and simply walk away from you and your bruised ego. My apologies.

[bazooka]

I'll be the bigger man here and simply walk away from you and your bruised ego. My apologies.

Whatever

You did say that.

[jimmalenko]

I've used both for long periods of time with not a bad word to say about either.

XP might take a little bit of time to piss off all the "noob-friendly" settings, but 2000 takes just as long to set up so that it acts like how some of XP's default features are configured.

Much of a muchness really, XP does have tons more drivers included with it, and Microsft support is certainly going to be an issue in the next 6-12 months IMO.

[tekkieman]

I hope somebody does! I purposely stayed out of this thread (because I knew where it was headed), until I saw that it was requested to lock this thread. That is totally unfair to the OP. He, as well as some other people want useful information, and it doesn't do anyone any good if people come in just to argue, and then get the thread locked!

Look, we all know that opinions are like arseholes. Everyone's got them, and they all stink. People like the OP asked a legitimate question, and want feedback. Let's give our feedback, and leave the rest out of it, rather than get the thread locked and deny others the same opportunity to leave their opinions in this thread.

[Cobra]

Well said!

[bazooka]

I hope somebody does! I purposely stayed out of this thread (because I knew where it was headed), until I saw that it was requested to lock this thread. That is totally unfair to the OP. He, as well as some other people want useful information, and it doesn't do anyone any good if people come in just to argue, and then get the thread locked!

Look, we all know that opinions are like arseholes. Everyone's got them, and they all stink. People like the OP asked a legitimate question, and want feedback. Let's give our feedback, and leave the rest out of it, rather than get the thread locked and deny others the same opportunity to leave their opinions in this thread.

I fully share your sentiment.

It was just funny that sac started something and then tried to say he was the bigger person.

We were doing fine until he flew in and started running his mouth.

[Pop's]

sacajaweeda wrote:
My point is simply that regardless of how much you think you might know, and whatever internet credentials you may care to wave in all of your blustering, you still don't have any clue as to what is best for me and my particular application, or my personal preference.

There's nothing wrong with my setup and none of your XP fanboyism and blustering is going to change that.

Regards,
__________________________________________________ ____
LOL be careful know it all will go tell on you.
XP Pro here on all our pc's, use to run 2000 but to many crashs when running raid and oc'ing.

http://www.pcpitstop.com/TechExpress.asp?id=JUSA9WEUY4RSE4Z7