W2K: Why is it so great?

With sources saying that Windows 7’ll be coming in about a year or so, why am I still running Windows 2000, an OS that’s 3 releases old already.

  • Because it doesn’t have the activation headaches that XP and Vista have.
  • Because it doesn’t have the baby-fied interfaces that XP and Vista do.
  • Because it runs better on older and newer hardware alike!
  • Because it still runs most of the apps XP does!
The Windows XP activation window

The Windows XP activation window

The crap XP interface

The crap XP interface

Plus, according to Microsoft, the Windows 2000 (Pro) system requirements are:

  • 133 MHz or more Pentium microprocessor (or equivalent). Windows 2000 Professional supports up to two processors on a single computer.
  • 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM recommended minimum. 32 MB of RAM is the minimum supported. 4 gigabytes (GB) of RAM is the maximum.
  • A 2 GB hard disk that has 650 MB of free space. If you are installing over a network, more free hard disk space is required.
  • VGA or higher-resolution monitor.
  • Keyboard.
  • Mouse or compatible pointing device (optional).

And, according to Microsoft, the XP (Pro) requirements are:

  • Pentium 233-megahertz (MHz) processor or faster (300 MHz is recommended)
  • At least 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM (128 MB is recommended)
  • At least 1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available space on the hard disk
  • CD-ROM or DVD-ROM drive
  • Keyboard and a Microsoft Mouse or some other compatible pointing device
  • Video adapter and monitor with Super VGA (800 x 600) or higher resolution
  • Sound card
  • Speakers or headphones

And finally, Microsoft’s posted Vista (Home Premium+) requirements:

  • 1-gigahertz (GHz) 32-bit (x86) processor or 1-GHz 64-bit (x64) processor
  • 1 GB of system memory
  • Windows Aero-capable graphics card

    Note This includes a DirectX 9-class graphics card that supports the following:

    • A WDDM driver
    • Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware
    • 32 bits per pixel
  • 128 MB of graphics memory (minimum)
  • 40-GB hard disk that has 15 GB of free hard disk space (the 15GB of free space provides room for temporary file storage during the install or upgrade.)
  • Internal or external DVD drive
  • Internet access capability
  • Audio output capability

2000 is the optimal choice for those of us who: want the best performance on their machines, don’t want the DRM that XP/Vista has, and/or don’t want the crappy interface XP and Vista have. 2000 runs most of the latest software. Either without modification or with. Hell it even runs COD4!


6 Responses to “W2K: Why is it so great?”

  1. Don_HH2K Says:

    Having actually run 2000 at close to its minimums (120MHz with 80MB of RAM instead of 133MHz with 64MB), I’ll tell you now it’s suicidal. My 2GB hard drive turned out to not be large enough to install Service Pack 4.

    2000 and XP both at 233MHz and 160MB of RAM are pretty quick, though XP needs a lot more shaving-down to become usable.

    Vista at 800MHz with 384MB of RAM doesn’t work at all, and for a time that was the second-fastest computer I owned… Strangely the second-fastest computer I own now is slower and has less RAM.

  2. stoperror Says:

    I’ve ran Neptune (The predicessor to XP alpha from late ’99) with 96MB of RAM on a P3 1.something GHz a few years ago and it wasn’t too bad. And then last year I ran XP in a VM with 64MB of RAM on my current machine and it wasn’t too bad either (I had IE7, WL Messenger and paint open). But Vista. Never ran that in a VM, and if I did it’d probably be the Starter Edition.

  3. andrewt3660 Says:

    A few months ago after having installed a copy of Windows XP onto a newly-acquired computer without an Internet connection (amongst the numerous electronics he keeps around), my grandfather mentioned to me that the OS was commanding him to “activate” it and asked what he should do. My reply was succinct: “That’s the reason I don’t use Windows XP.” (To be fair, it’s not the only reason, but it is one of the biggest.)

    From the very beginning, I predicted that MS would cease to activate copies of ‘XP somewhere along the line…and given how today they almost seem to deny that Windows 95/NT4 and earlier versions ever existed, that doesn’t seem unlikely. While it hasn’t happened yet, we’ll see what changes are in store after Windows 7 comes out and XP’s “support” resources finally dry up.

  4. stoperror Says:

    There’s always a crack. I don’t know about you, but I feel that since I splurged a few hundred bucks on Windows, I should be able to do what I want with it, and if that means disable the DRM, then I will do so!

    Plus, there is always Windows FLP (if you can obtain it). From what I’ve heard and seen it’s XP done right.

  5. jtleon Says:

    Hypothetically, I have seen FLP in action, and can honestly say it is indeed XP done right – No wonder MS is keeping it secret!

  6. stoperror Says:

    That’s what belongs on the EEE-PC and the other netbooks. “Windows for Netbook edition”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: