| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Why your Windows should be XP | |
|
||
| Time: 12:04 EST/17:04 GMT | News Source: ZDNet | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
OK, now that we've gotten that out of your systems for you, we can report that despite what you Microsoft haters would like to hear, Windows XP is simply the best OS that the company has come up with to date. Granted, with recent releases like Windows Me, the bar wasn't so high. But with the release of Windows XP, Microsoft has managed to build upon the stability of Windows 2000 while adding a slew of features that home and business users will likely welcome with open arms. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 328 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:16:58 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 61 (65.34.110.20) at 12/28/2001 1:25:24 PM |
|
#2
It works fine, you just need to install the applications. Your My Documents from WinMe don't come up in XP because the location of my documents in WinMe is c:\My Documents.... in NT, it's c:\Documents and Settings\User Name\My Documents... One thing you might one to try is running the Files and Settings Transfer Wizard, should get you most of your stuff ported over. #5 What exactly is wrong with it? Maybe if you provide any type of problems you are having, we can either help you fix it, or report a bug to MS. |
| #2 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 12/28/2001 1:31:54 PM |
|
#2
Did you install XP to the same partition as ME? If so, that can cause problems. If it's on a different partition, then try #6 advice and use Files and Settings transfer Wizard. |
| #3 By 1295 (216.84.210.100) at 12/28/2001 1:49:59 PM |
|
#2 You need serious help is you can't get that to work.
#5 XP is definitly ready for Prime Time. Its been ready for Prime Time (minus some drivers) since Beta2 if you ask me. I used it for everything since Beta2 on and it hasn't had any problems besides scanner drivers (fixed in RC1). And no, I don't just surf the web and use office. I do graphics, prepress work, video and alot of gaming. However, I would be happy to hear you out if you can give me some reasons that is isn't ready. I sure hope that you aren't using Windows 9x or ME as a subsitute. The only other OS I would and do run is Windows 2000. #7 I'm on a dialup at home and I'll let you in on a little secret. you only need the patches that apply to you. Second if they are big... do this. Start the Computer Login Dial-up (brush your teeth while this happens) Begin downloading patches Go To Sleep Wake Up Reboot Shut Down. Go to work/school. Man that is a bitch isn't it? Actually all you have to do is dial up because XP will download the needed files for you. Then in the morning take it offline and allow it to install the patches. Also, If you were running any other OS you would still have to deal with this. Hell almost every software package out there requires patches. I can't think of One I use that doesn't (not just MS software) |
| #4 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/28/2001 2:51:24 PM |
|
#12 - I think it depends. We are planning a potentional 5K deployment of XP to our company. However we only have 4 desktop models to deal with, and they are all Compaq well-known equipment.
We've done some upgrades from existing NT 4.0 installs, and the main problems encountered were solved by uninstalling some Compaq custom utilities before doing the upgrade, and also updating the BIOS on the machine. The biggest issue from my standpoint is the compatibility of specialized apps. I work with the Mercury suite of testing tools, and they don't presently work right with XP. But then they perform very low level functions. |
| #5 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 12/28/2001 11:10:43 PM |
|
#17 - I guess I have to agree with #16. Every clean install I've performed has gone flawlessly. It was only the upgrades from NT4 which were strange.
#18 - Honestly don't understand why you dislike the new start menu or taskbar. |
| #6 By 61 (65.34.110.20) at 12/29/2001 11:31:11 AM |
|
#25
More like we are tired of people spreading BS, like yourself! And in fact, you make no sense at all. You are saying that XP is the same thing as 2k, or NT4, or NT 3.5.... they aren't just "repackaging the shit". I think it's you that needs to get a life. |
| #7 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 12/29/2001 12:43:23 PM |
|
#25
If Microsoft is repackaging the same product, what do the different Linux distributors do when they roll a kernel update into pretty-much the same packaging, increment the version number, and release it for sale (Especially vendors like Red Hat that even try to mirror Microsoft's pricing structure)? |
| #8 By 20 (168.215.253.242) at 12/29/2001 1:01:20 PM |
|
It is easy to disprove that Windows XP is just a "repackaging" of Win2K. To say that XP is a repackaging of NT4/3.51 is simply absurd. It's like saying Solaris is just a repackaging of System V. Based on and repackaging are two different things.
I will, however, admit that there aren't any HUGE differences between WinXP and Win2K. But this was by design. MS has committed itself to shorter release cycles to get less features out more quickly. XP, however, does accomplish much more than Win2K in that it unifies the product line once and forever. -d |
| #9 By 1845 (12.254.240.94) at 12/29/2001 5:20:19 PM |
| Completely off topic - is anyone having problems logging into msdn subscriber downloads? |
| #10 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 12/29/2001 7:05:51 PM |
|
#35
My point was that it is obvious that Microsoft does not simply repackage the same product. But if someone thinks that that is what MS does, then there are other companies that can be used as better examples. I used the various Linux distributors as such an example. Another example is Apple's Mac OS. There was not much change there until OS 8, and a lot of the changes from OS 8 to OS X have been the addition of Windows UI features (in addition to multitasking, multithreading, auto memory management, SMP etc.) such as proportional scrollbars, sticky menus, an explorer-like file manager, a notification area work-alike, etc.. Various Linux GUIs also try mimmic the Windows GUI. A portion of the Linux community constantly bashes MS software while simultaneously working to get that same software running under Linux. Linux is always perfect until there is a rumor of John Carmack rewriting the IP stack or MS open-sourcing Windows or Office so the users can rape the code. MS has made many changes in the way XP does things even in comparison to Win 2k. These changes are well documented on MSDN. The GUI is not the only thing that has changed. And if MS is so inept, then their "competitors" must be more inept as they keep looking at what MS is doing and try to do the exact same thing, instead of doing their own research and developing something new. The companies could be more successful if their every move wasn't based upon their leaders' desire to kill or outdo Microsoft. Also, as inept as some claim MS to be, I have never had Windows wipe my data because the power went out while the OS was running, or have a kernel upgrade corrupt the file system. |
| #11 By 2062 (63.11.147.227) at 12/29/2001 7:30:35 PM |
|
As far as Apple goes, i think there getting a free ride. Just think week they released osx 10.2 i believe which is the 2nd update since osx was released like a year ago at most. I think its bs because microsoft gets put down for having security holes and too many updates, but if you compare windows xp to apple's osx, both companies are really doing the same thing.
As far as winxp being a minor update from win2k, i will agree that most of the winxp code is win2k sp2, however under the hood there are some very significant enhancements that will result in a much better computing experience. However people just care about the GUI. I dont really get it, people are always complaining how each version of windows looks the same, but if you think about it, if microsoft released a totally different UI, people would be bitching that it takes too long to learn...cant please everyone. -gosh |
| #12 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 12/29/2001 8:02:29 PM |
|
Exactly #37.
Also, Apple shipped the equivalent of a beta OS as retail, and required you to have multiple OSes installed if you wanted to use your old apps. Speed improvements and feature additions came with the updates, one of which you would have originally had to pay for (only $20, but this still pissed off a lot of Mac users) until Apple made it free from the Apple stores for current OS X owners (still $20 from the website). MS implemented backward compatibillity through compatability mode (which started in Win 2k). How many people would accept it if MS made system builders ship computers with dual-boot images. |
| #13 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 12/30/2001 2:38:55 AM |
|
So today I'm playing around with WinXP a bit, and just have to say to anyone who doesn't think XP is different from 2k I challenge you to go compare the Application Properties for a package in Component Services.
WinXP shiped with COM+ v1.5 support. I had thought this was only coming in .Net server, but I guess I was wrong. What's this mean? Application pooling, application recycling, ability to run as a service, ability to disable(pause) an application, better debug support and a variety of other features. http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/08/ComXP/ComXP.asp For anyone developing COM+ objects for a web middle tier these improvements are tremendous! It's just unfortunately that we're still only talking about the desktop so the features are only useful for development and testing. But when .Net server goes Gold, this will be really cool. There's also MSMQ 3.0 features which are new, although I haven't investigated to see which pieces are in WinXP desktop. I also haven't looked into what IIS 5.1 brings to the table, it may not be quite as dramatic as the COM+ updates. |
| #14 By 1845 (12.254.240.94) at 12/30/2001 10:39:59 PM |
| How exactly were you ripped 42? Perhaps because you spent money before researching the product? That sounds to me like the consumer should take more responsibility for his actions. |
| #15 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 12/31/2001 12:07:13 AM |
|
#41 - What do you mean not using components? What is it you are doing, building everything into custom services?
|
| #16 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/31/2001 10:45:53 AM |
|
#45 - Ahh, you misunderstand. I was talking about the building of an n-tier web application. What's provided in WinXP is a preview of what will come in .Net server and is useful for doing development for later deployment.
This was clarified in the next to last paragraph in my first post. |
| #17 By 14 (207.5.146.88) at 12/31/2001 7:42:11 PM |
| So much hate a discontent...If you dont like it .....dont buy it....simple as that |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 328 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:16:58 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
