Fwom:Dave ( snipped-for-privacy@hursley.ibm.com)
Win2000 is a significantly better version of NT than XP.
NT
Highly subjective answer there - I happen to believe that XP is better
- but of course thats a subjective answer....
First, please don't top post, it doesn't make sense.
Second, there is nothing subjective about it - 2000 is vastly superior. XP is 2000 with a bunch of useless addons (Windows Security Center, Windows Firewall, Windows Firewall etc.), a much ruined user interface and a horribly broken built in file search utility.
When you say you 'believe' it is better, is that a religious thing, or do you have solid reasons?
On 12 Jan 2005 11:57:38 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@meeow.co.uk (N. Thornton) strung together this:
Although you are quite correct, use a proper newsreader.
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 20:48:55 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@a.com strung together this:
From what perspective?
I think most are on usenet.
Drifting more OT, that can be fixed with a few settings tweeks [1]. The limitation is that when XP is asked to search "ALL" files, it takes that to mean all file formats that it has a "filter" for.
[1] One solution:Open Search window and click ion the "indexing service" link. This will dsiplay the settings dialog.
Ignore whether it is enabled or not (does not affect the ability to search all files) and click the Advanced button. This will open the Indexing Service management console.
Click the "Show/Hide console tree icon on the tool bar". This will split the window into two panes. One the left hand pane right click the top level entry for "Indexing Service on Local Machine", and select "Properties" from the context menu.
In the Properties window, tick the "Index files with unknown extensions" option and OK your way out of all the dialogs.
Search in XP will now work like it did in Win2K
Loads of crap is enabled by default - just disable it.
I don't use it, so I don't need to. But that's precisely my point - to get XP behaving like it should (like 2k), it takes a couple of hours of changing settings and disabling stuff. Why??
In order to keep their marketing people happy they have to come up with all sorts of compelling reasons why each Windows version is better than the previous one, so everything is enabled by default because most users wouldn't even know what the "improvements" were, let alone how to activate them. Do you really think it takes two hours to fix it all?
About that, yes. I've done it several times for users who switched to XP from 2k then wanted a non-broken user interface.
Whatever did they change to XP in the first case. IMHO Win 2K was/is about the best that microsnot has ever offered .
Apart from MS-DOS 7
I totally agree with you. They changed because the latest thing "must be the best thing". Surely you know, anyone using Windows /2000/ in
2004/2005 is way behind the times.
Ah!, thats fine then;)
Any tips Grunff, have just installed XP on a new pc for a friend. I use Linux here.
Dave
Personally I never used 2K - I skipped straight to XP from '98, and I suppose I find it marginally better (having customised it to my own needs. Certainly more stable anyway.
I'm not an IT professional, and please feel free to shoot me down, but I think much of the issue is MS's one-size-fits-all-approach. They are providing essentially one OS to suit all users, from highly clued-up, high-end users right down to my 70-something mum who decided about a year ago to get a computer. MS need to attract people like her to keep expanding their customer base, and TBH I think they've done a pretty good job with XP from that point of view. Twenty-odd years ago, my mum would no more have been able to handle working in MS-DOS or use my old
1200/75 modem, than she would have been able to pilot a space shuttle, yet now, notwithstanding her advancing years, she's happily hooked on broadband internet, emails family and friends around the world, does lots of scanning, graphics editing, all sorts.On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:24:58 GMT, Lobster strung together this:
As much as I hate windows, it's here and I have to support it.
They started out with two 'levels' of Windows, NT for business and wonky for home. This worked as well as Windows ever did until they released the converged 'one size fits all' XP.
As much as I agree with you in that it's easy to use for first time Windowers it's a nightmare for 'proper' applications in a business environment. I still use 2000 for new systems supplied for business use, (and at home too).
If they continued along the 2 seperate paths then there wouldn't be as much anamosity towards XP as proffesionals could carry on using proper versions.
Or something like that......
Depends what your friend's needs are, and what (s)he's used to using. If (s)he's been using 2k and has just switched to XP, then I'd start with the following:
- Install SP2, then download the latest set of patches.
- Disable Windows Firewall. Use a real firewall.
- Disable Windows Security Center.
- Hate to say it, but use some AV (nod32 is reasonably good)
- Tell them not to use IE/OE/Outlook. Install firefox and thunderbird instead.
- Turn off the silly XP theme.
Even after all this, it still won't be as secure or as useable as a well configure linux box. I use both windows and linux every day - I have no choice in the matter, much of my work is windows based.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.