Win XP vs Win 2000

[p]

My understanding of XP is that it is win2000 with a skin

[Jarrod]

My understanding of XP is that it is win2000 with a skin

Mine as well.  (With some added security updates) If you need testers on different OS's when the game is coming closer to completion then shoot me an email.  I have Win 98, 2000 and XP machines that I can test on.  (I can even test on a copy of German Win2k)    

[ejx982]

My understanding of XP is that it is win2000 with a skin

Oh my gawd, that comment was serious?  I thought you were just kidding...

[Mike of fire:)]

My understanding of XP is that it is win2000 with a skin

I must agree with ejx982. If thats ur understanding of xp then either u need to find someone who can show u the light OR u need to except that u don't know squat about windows xp  :glare:

Heh heh sorry about that but what i say is true

[Swift]

I moved the last few posts here since they were off-topic. The FAQ is meant to be on-topic.

[p]

I was about to come to this poor poster's rescue, until I realized that it was me that posted it

Obviously XP wasN'T written from the ground up.  It is an "upgraded" win 2000... except XP purpose was to counter MACs new and more beautiful interface.  

If I wasn't lazy, I'd track down an article that talked about it.  Obviously for the less geeky amoung us, XP and 2000 are hugely different.  But if you want to get technical (the nuts and bolts of it), they're about the same. so nah  <_<

[Brassfire]

The basis of XP is the NT line, not the 9x line. So 2000 to XP is about the same difference as 95 to 98.

[p]

Well yeh, that's partly what I mean.  2000/NT users upgraded to "XP Professional" and win 98/ME users upgraded to "XP Home addition."   For the 98/ME users, this was a big upgrade because they were moving to a more stable kernel originally designed for servers.  So basically Microsoft took win2000, stripped out IIS, added some skins, made it more direct-x friendly, and bundled in some entertainment software.  That's what you're getting with XP.  And that's what I mean about XP being basically 2000 with a skin.  The core components are the same.
 
either u need to except that i know mor then squat about windows xp, OR u need to STFU!!!!!  LOL!1  

[Corsair5]

...You remind me of Battle.Net idiots, Mr. P.

[Ignus_Draconus]

I prefer XP to 2000 because XP has a DOS emulator (most of my computer games run on dos)

[lazygamer]

...You remind me of Battle.Net idiots, Mr. P.

Mr. P is providing details to attempt to back up his point, his critics are giving vague dismissals of his competence.

[Swift]

Agreed.

PHattiE has made some valid points without attacking anyone, unlike his critics. Whoever makes any rude remarks towards PHattiE will have his/her warning level increased.

[phats]

aw, you guys are so nice.  Seriously tho, I can take it.  Bring on the critisism.  I'll step down if you can prove me wrong, and I don't care how cruely you go about doing it either

I hadn't considered XP's DOS emulator.  Perhaps I am wrong about 2000 and XP?  I dunno, but I don't care.  I'm a little surprised this got its own thread to be honest.

                       

[Brassfire]

It is *basically* 2000 with a nicer skin... but it does have some alterations. Like win98 being *basically* win95 with a few alterations. But it was still a fairly big leap.

Likewise, XP is still a fairly big leap.

[Louisiana Night]

I would say it's debatable about how similar they are (it greatly depends on your point of view).

Here are a handful of differences, between the two OSs( ignoring all but the latest versions of both ). I would name similarities, but I think everyone here agrees that the kernel( core coding/base code ) is the main thing that makes them similar(and nobody seems to have touched on the differences, which is the reason I'm posting here ).


Differences
1.WinXP has greatly increased Win9x and DOS compatibility
2.WinXP allows FAT, NTFS, and soon WinFS filesystems (WinFS should be public within a few months),Win2000 is only capable of creating NTFS partitions (to the best of my knowledge).
3.XP is capable of using 64-bit apps
4.XP has that weird cd-key/ownership validation( I'm not sure what the correct term is )
5.I understand that some Longhorn software/features will be "backported" to XP, such as WinFS filesystem, and not 2000( WinFS is the only one I can think of, off hand ).
7.WinXP has a more "user-friendly" interface(perty colours )
8.Increased software support (and increased support from Microsoft, compared to 2000)
9.I think there is more support for multiple users using one machine in XP, but I'm not completely sure


Win98SE/Win95
Even Win98SE has major differences to Win98( stronger USB support, for one ), and the differences between 95 is greater.
Example=some programs, such as Hijack95, were quite buggy in Win98(almost unusable).

Feel free to correct any errors I have made in this post( in reference to the subject/topic at hand ).