On 1/27/07, Herbert Graf <mailinglist3@farcite.net> wrote:
> But what does XP have over 2k (aside from the cartoonish theme)? There
> are a few minor things, but on the whole XP offers very little that 2k
> didn't. That's my point. No matter what MS was trying on their marketing
> side, XP does NOT offer enough IMHO to warrant an upgrade from 2k. In
> fact, I run 2k on my desk at work. I could upgrade to XP at any moment
> for free (company site license), I don't since it doesn't offer me a
> single thing I want. At home my laptop runs XP, only because that's what
> it came with. If it hadn't come with an OS I probably would have
> installed 2k.
>

I have to disagree here. Windows XP supports much more hardware than
Windows 2k. For Laptop users, Windows XP has much better power
management features. Windows 2k support will soon finish yet
Windows XP support will be extended to year 2014.

One obvious thing XP is better is that the startup time is much shorter
than Windows 2k, especially in a networked environment.

That being said, most of the Windows aler are not from upgrade,
but from new computer sale. So it is right not to update Windows
but to buy a new PC.
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist