XP or 2000 Prof.?

[magic_plank]

Which OS is best?
I would like honest, unbiased comparisons from those with experience!

Would I be right saying that 2000 professional offers most of what XP has but takes up less room, memory and doesn't have some of the useless bells and whistles?

If not please correct me!

[TN2COOL]

Pretty much, yeah, how much ram and processor speed do you have?
XP is easier to tweak and play around with reg settings though.

[GX1_Man]

You have summed it up very well. All of the good stuff, none of the fluff.

[magic_plank]

Would you recommend it for a p4, 1gb ram machine that feels as if it isnt running as fast as it could?

[Min]

Is it dual core dual channel?

Have you disabled the paging executive?

Do you use diskeeper 10 Pro? If not it's worth watching their flash demo especially about the bit about the Master File Tables and the use of Frag-Shield.

[soybean]

Would you recommend it for a p4, 1gb ram machine that feels as if it isnt running as fast as it could?

You mean XP, right?  Are you serious?  If that machine won't run XP well after a fresh OS installation, then there's something wrong the machine.  Last summer, I installed a new hard drive for my nephew, a college student.  He gave me the Win XP and Office 2003 CD's he bought - no, stole - at academic pricing from the college bookstore.  The computer had a 600MHz Duron processor with 384MB PC133 memory.  It ran fine with Win XP.

[nigel123]

work this one out i've got 2 machines the one downstairs (which the kids use) has a celeron 1700 mhz processor, 256 ddr memory and a 80g hard drive, the machine upstairs has a pentium 3 450 mhz processor, 320mb sdram and a 40g hard drive. both machines have windows xp home on them. the machine upstairs runs like the wind the one downstairs runs like a snail. know what would you put this down to the celeron processor or kids on the internet or both.

[GX1_Man]

Or all of the above plus less RAM.