I am surprised there is not a very long thread about XP already! Maybe I missed it somewhere?

Anyway, I have absolutely had it with Windows 98, I don't run older applications so I don't need DOS support, and I play EverQuest and other games so I want a system that has lots of software written for it.

I am going to upgrade my OS within the next month or so... I've been waiting too long already for a stable platform. My dilemma is whether to go with XP or jump on 2K while I still can.

As usual, any comments are appreciated
Until you see some reviews of Windows XP, or software written for it,

I would suggest to Upgrade to Windows 2000 Pro, untill you see it's safe to use Windows XP...
Mainly because it takes a few months before the move to it after the initial release becomes a reality.

I dislike XP for its lack of security when you are off a domain (NTFS Folder/File Security, etc).

That, and I really don't like half the icons

Win2k is tried and true and will be a stepping stone if nothing else to XP.

I recommend Win2k to get your feet wet and to learn a true NT/NTFS file structure.
Combat Chuck
I accually got to see and use the beta test of XP
it preforms very nicely. Win 95 and 98 were both code based in the same programming as NT 95 was more of NT and they started to stray on 98 but ME, 2000, and whatever the other one is has a different type of programming that was way different than NT. ME, 2000 have known errors in it of course all elctrict things do but these have some major programming flaws that are known. XP used the origal NT programming and it doesn't crash unless u really screw around with it. I talked with some people at Microsoft and they said go for XP it may be more now but its worth it. I have it on my comps and its gr8. Most programs and hardware are compatible with XP even if the software/hardware came out befor XP. SO this is my opion/facts but i say go for XP....

I have actually heard good things about it but I'll be waitin for SP2 to show up for it and then I'll consider. For some reason in my old age I don't like to format anymore...hmm
right now I'd go with Windows 2000 SP2, its rock stable and as long as you don't check email with a user id that has admin priveledges its pretty hard to completely wreck the OS. XP also needs a lot beefier box to get the same performance.

If you are a big time 3d gamer your FPS will be a bit lower with Win2K than XP and much lower than 98SE, but the stability is worth it.
I'm running xp final right now and it rules...It is the most compatible o/s since 98 as far as games go...Like, for instance, I can install and run NFS 3 and 4 which was a problem with Win2k...It is fast as hell too...Once I get a driver for my DSL modem, all my comps are gonna be switched to xp...
Hmm...maybe I'll have to give XP a try sooner than I thought!
I did some research about the NTFS security problem that I have with it.

It will never be available to home users, nor any computer NOT on a domain... meaning connected to a windowsNT/2k/XP server.

There are ways around it, but one is a dos command line, and a second that is a 3rd party utility that is a GUI, but ends up doing it in a command line.

I still have major problems with XP! Down with the satanic spawn that is XP!

That, and I'm peeved about the security thing
So your saying you won't have file level security on a XP machine unless you are a member of a domain??
Marco C
By "day" I work for a small software company where we have to QA a ton of different titles on multiple machines / OS combos...

In my opinion, for the vast majority of users, XP should be the OS of choice. It is EXTREMELY stable, compatible and I actually like the new look, especially is you're running at high-res (which is what it was designed for).

I've regularly been using XP since RC1 and have been very impressed. My only major gripe is with activation...when will these f'n companies learn that no matter what measures they take, someone will find a way around it? I'm ALL FOR a company protecting their property, but I think they'd sell more copies if they released the product at a much better price point...which they could do if they didn't spend a ton of money developing a security scheme...

Oh Yeah, Crash...I noticed you were in CT and were waiting for DSL drivers. If you're on Verison, or similar provider, and you need a PPPoE driver (To replace the WinPoet), it's actually already on the XP CD...Just load the drivers from there...

Originally posted by kodger
So your saying you won't have file level security on a XP machine unless you are a member of a domain??

pretty much. like right now in win2k, with NTFS installed, you can setup file and folder permissions for accounts, domains, etc... doesn't matter if you run win2k by itself, or if you are on a workgroup/domain. the option is there no matter what.

in winXP, you don't even have a security tab unless you are on a domain! you can't even install it i guess. a way around is to install it on a domain, then just login locally. but that doesn't mean everyone has access to a domain to set it up.

my friends are still trying to find a way around it. so far, what we have found is you have to install some stupid security plugins into MMC which do NOT make it very user friendly. especially since it isn't released to the public, we can't find documentation on it. the beta site doesn't have anything like that. the beta testers are still griping about other stupd stuff
Man that is beat....I can't believe they would do that!! Do they think everyone is on a domain or what?

Personally at my home I wouldn't care but it can be a very useful support tool...locking users out of places they shouldn't be. Croikee!!
AHA! Damn XP!

They hid how to do it. Completly changed it on me. NOW I will look into moving to XP.

Read this:

XP NTFS Security (How to turn it on without being on a domain)

So, my argument holds no water. Tolasar's website lead me to it (He posted a link to their "How-To's" and I searched through it. Good job tolasar!