08-16-2012, 05:43 AM
The problem with XP is it takes twice as much resouces to run it than 2000 does. 2000 is just the business version of XP, leaner, meaner and MUCH more efficent. However it doesn't have some of the consumer bell and whistles like being able to turn your cursor into a flying airplane with a spinning prop. 
I would rather have those resources availible to run my games, er, I mean work programs. 
2000 also won't give you blue screens of death or crashes, after all these years with it I have never had either one. After using whatever the Mac OS's were from 1989 thru 2002 (at work) and after using Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP and Vista I can honestly say 2000 has been by far the most stable and trouble free of the bunch.
I would rather have those resources availible to run my games, er, I mean work programs. 2000 also won't give you blue screens of death or crashes, after all these years with it I have never had either one. After using whatever the Mac OS's were from 1989 thru 2002 (at work) and after using Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP and Vista I can honestly say 2000 has been by far the most stable and trouble free of the bunch.
Mike
Sent from my pocket calculator using two tin cans and a string
Sent from my pocket calculator using two tin cans and a string