RE: XP, 2K, or ME (was: RE: VPC: which runs fastest, XP, 2000, 98?)

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

From: Joel Nelson (joel.w.nelson1_at_no.msn.spam.com)
Date: 09/14/04 

Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:08:43 -0500

On 9/13/04 7:28 PM, in article
a4c58075.0409131628.192da121@posting.google.com, Bill Williamson wrote:

> Joel Nelson <joel.w.nelson1@no.msn.spam.com> wrote in message
> news:<BD6B5288.5D69%joel.w.nelson1@no.msn.spam.com>...
>> I currently have Windows ME in VPC 6.1.1 -- its performance is acceptable
>> but it's still Windows ME? would I have any speed improvement or better
>> stability with either Windows 2000 or Windows XP? Iıll stay with ME if
>> itıs the fastest option (other than 95/98/NT4) but if I could use either
>> 2000 or XP without sacrificing speed and performance that would be great. I
>> know Microsoft advertises XP as the ³fastest Windows² and XP supports the
>> most programs, but I know it is also a bigger OS and it seems it would
>> significantly slow things down. I donıt know anything about Windows 2000 ?
>> I know that despite XPıs popularity people in the PC world are still buying
>> Windows 2000 ? but since I guess itıs also a WinNT-based system rather than
>> a DOS-based system would it also be slow?
>>
>> Specs:
>> iBook G3 700 MHz
>> OS X (10.3.5)
>> 384 MB RAM
>> Microsoft Virtual PC 6.1.1
>> Hi Joel:
> I've never run Win ME on VPC, but have used 98,2000, and XP with 98
> being the fastest. For reliability and stability however I like 2000
> Pro - its almost as fast as 98 and has many more features. XP has a
> lot of eye candy and is a real huge memory and disk space hog. In
> order to get it to run adequately much of this has to turned off - see
> a web site called blackviper.com for some good advice.
>
>
>> --
Would XP with all eye candy/effects off still be slower than 2000 or would
they be about the same? XP seems to be more secure with the SP2 but if 2000
would still be faster it will be the way to go.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: XP, 2K, or ME (was: RE: VPC: which runs fastest, XP, 2000, 98?)
    ... would I have any speed improvement or better ... > stability with either Windows 2000 or Windows XP? ... > know Microsoft advertises XP as the ³fastest Windows² and XP supports the ...
    (microsoft.public.mac.virtualpc)
  • Re: XP, 2K, or ME (was: RE: VPC: which runs fastest, XP, 2000, 98?)
    ... would I have any speed improvement or better ... > stability with either Windows 2000 or Windows XP? ... Win98 seems to be the fastest under VPC 6. ...
    (microsoft.public.mac.virtualpc)
  • Re: I want to be convinced; convince me.
    ... Nightly reboots are needed for stability ... >> Why is a windows system more robust than a Linux or OS X system? ... > None of this has anything to do with stability. ... > cooling like Apple does, your system wouldn't be very loud either. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Any experience with "The Last One"?
    ... It's true that since the cost of entry to the shareware market is so ... There is no freeware package on Windows ... Stability is important, a certain amount of stability is indeed a sine ... >>The ones who like to play games would not be too happy with it. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: Any experience with "The Last One"?
    ... >>useful features than the majority of shareware in the same category, ... and brings down the average quality. ... There is no freeware package on Windows ... >Stability is important, a certain amount of stability is indeed a sine ...
    (comp.programming)