Customer Reviews

Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional Upgrade - Old Version

5 star:		(66)
4 star:		(25)
3 star:		(10)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(17)

 

 

Let me tell you Microsoft has done something right finally. Windows 2000 has the stability of NT and the compatability of 98(well almost). I have it running for a week(I had advanced copy) so far and there hasn't been a crash nor a blue screen of death like in Windows 98 SE. The basic requirement I think is a lot of ram, 64+ is fine but I think 128 is good and 256 the optimal. Windows 2000 Professional is easy to use, it looks just like Windows 98 except underneath all of it, it's the NT kernel, which means stability. Windows 2000 has gotten rid of DOS(almost) there is very little dos support and you may not be able to play certain legacy games. The good thing is that companies are writing drivers so that there is a lot of compatability with new things. Basically everything you have in Win98 can probably run in Win2000. There is a program you can download at Microsoft.com to check if there are any compatability issues. The fact that Microsoft must first approve software drivers before it is made available to the public is another boon. I hope this has helped you! Windows 2000 is really great compared to Win98 or 95!

If you're a gamer, you will be disappointed with this OS, because it is not designed to support many popular Win9x games. Happily, this is the ONLY drawback to Windows 2000. In every other respect, this operating system is excellent! For the first time ever, Microsoft brought a product to market that was solid and reliable from the moment you install it.

A compatibility checker program is included on the installation disk to warn you if you have hardware that lacks Windows 2000 support. If you have a popular computer platform, such as a Dell or Compaq, most (if not all) of the necessary drivers will be setup during the installation.

My computer consulting business depends on a solid and reliable operating system. My laptop came with Windows Me and crashed DAILY! Why Bill Gates pushed Windows Me into production without the same care as Windows 2000 is a mystery and a shame.

Here's the deal...

-If you have Windows 98 and use your machine specifically for business, GET WINDOWS 2000! Don't wait for XP. You will pay a lot for multimedia features that require more memory and processor power.

-If you're into gadgets, music and video games don't bother with Windows 2000. Windows 9x/Me will play your titles much better than Windows 2000. You can also wait for Windows XP Home or Professional editions, which Microsoft claims has twice the software compatibility of Windows 2000 and is backward compatible all the way back to DOS. In addition, you will get the stability of Windows NT with your gaming and office work. Bear in mind that XP is for computers less than three years old. Make sure you meet the hardware requirements!

-If your machine is on the older side, (Pentium II 200Mhz or slower) you will not be happy with the XP upgrade. To play games on these systems, I recommend staying with Windows 95/98. Windows 2000 will run on these computers provided the system has at least a Pentium 166 and 64MB of RAM.

Think of Windows 2000 as an all business, no nonsense OS. You get limited multimedia support and a rock solid platform to run your programs. Windows XP will be a combination of the multimedia and plug and play ease of Windows 98 and the stability of the Windows NT architecture. I've read nothing but glowing reviews of XP and intend to experiment with it on my next PC.

Another benefit...
In addition to running on older systems, Windows 2000 Professional was designed specifically for laptops. Those of you running Windows NT4 on a laptop are familiar with the headaches of data corruption and driver installations. Win2000 was designed for laptops. Advanced power management is built in and the hibernation mode is an excellent convenience. I save my work, close the screen and pack the machine in my bag. The computer stores RAM on disk and shuts off. Wake up time is less than one minute on my Dell Inspiron.

As it often happens with Microsoft, Windows 2000 is another mystery. It was released after one disaster (Windows ME) and before another one (XP).
True, it's not as multimedia-friendly as XP. But 2000 is true to its goal - successor to Windows NT. It's stable as no other Windows OS, much more multimedia-friendly than NT ever was and doesn't require devices made yesterday - it flawlessly supports all devices I currently have (and some of them date from 1992).
From a developer's point of view, 2000 is robust, stable and doesn't waste CPU cycles on stupid things, like soccermomish GUI (*cough* XP! *cough*). I would even go so far as to say that it runs faster on older systems than Windows NT 4 itself (the pinnacle of all things minimum).

I often toyed with the idea of switching to Linux, but Linux GUIs are still either a) too crash-prone or b) unpolished and repugnant to the eye (all this if you look past software availability limitations). Windows 2000 offers the stability of a Unix command-prompt with a pleasing GUI - a combination that will probably not be achieved any time soon.

I want to start off by saying this is an AWSOME OS! I'm not going to say I'm this great programmer who "Knows what's best" but it is great... BUT! ... it's been released 3 months two soon! I just spent over $900 upgrading a 3-month-old computer and I can't... a) Burn any cds, HP told me a driver for their burners would be out in 4-5 months b) I can't play games with my new Annihilator Pro, "which I'm REALLY mad". Creative gave me a 3-4 month wait on drivers c) The SB Live! Cards will work... but ONLY the basics, like playing sound. d) Diamond mm (for modem) didn't even plan on having a win 2k driver, so that's out the window! Those are just a few of the "small" details that add up to a big "MS Word Only" machine When new drivers start coming out this OS will be great, It has NEVER crashed (about 3 weeks now) and if a program crashes ONLY the program shuts down, not all of windows, it's great. If your home is networked than you might want to consider this. My network (1 server, 4 computers, 1 print server, 1 router) has never worked this smoothly, and I've never had this much control over it. Like Microsoft, Amazon, PC mag and many others say DON'T UPGRADE IF YOUR A HOME USER! Wait for Windows 98 millennium. Feel free to email me if you have any other questions.

Stability. That one word describes Windows 2000 perfectly. You won't see the crashes. If you're an experienced 95-98 user or familiar with Me (should have been named Ne for Nightmare Edition) 2000 fills the bill. I found the connect speed to be every bit as fast as 98 if not faster. With Me you'd get either the dreaded Mr. Freeze or the dreaded Blue Screen of Death. These are things of the past with 2000. Me also couldn't handle my Inspiron 5000e, with one crash leading to another. The good folks at Dell were nice enough to allow me to upgrade to the Inspiron 8000 and Windows 2000. End result? No more crashes.

Many will tell you that 2000 is not suitable for home use. I can't imagine using any of Microsoft's other products at home where your time is every bit as valuable as at work. This system complements both enviroments very well. You might have a little difficulty with the drivers, most of which can be corrected with downloads. But for the time you'll save with crashes and freezes using this remarkable OS, it's worth every penny. I highly recommend it.

The title says it all. This is the best MS OS out there. I am strictly a home user, and use my machine 95% for gaming and 5% for development of graphics/software. Let me get this out in the open right now: 2K Pro runs ABSOLUTELY FINE WITH GAMES. With DirectX 7.0+ you will be able to play 99.5% of the games out there now. Practically anything that ran on 95/98 will run on 2K without a hitch. This OS is very much a home OS as much as it is a work OS.

It may take a bit more hardware than previous versions of windows, but the performance increases are greatly worth it. I am running a 1 GHz PIII with 512M of ram. When I ran 98se, a fresh reboot would result in approx 200 to 225 Megs of RAM being used. On a fresh reboot of Win2K, only 70 - 90 Megs of RAM are utilized. (Your results will vary depending on your system specs). Applications such as Visual Studio 6, Adobe Photoshop 6, 3D Studio Max, Office2K/XP, etc all run faster (especially Photoshop and the Office suites), than they ever did on a 98SE system. 2K blows 95/98SE and even the XP Pro operating systems out of the water performance wise.

I also noted that once I switched from 98SE to 2K, my broadband connection was sped up (around 25 to 50KB/s). I can't really comment on the whole networking of large amounts of computers through a domain with 2K, but I have 4 computers running in my home on a local workgroup through a router, and it was über easy to get them to talk to one another. Even sharing the printer connected to one of the computers with the other 3 was no sweat. File sharing among the computers is easy to set up as well, as is setting users and permissions. It really isn't as hard as some make it out to be.

Bottom line, Win2K offers all the usability (if you can call it that) and compatibility of Windows 98SE, with the stability of NT4. Keep in mind that a bunch of these reviews that complain about the lack of gaming support, or the presence of bugs were written before DirectX 7.0 and higher was available, and before Service Pack 2 was available. SP2 by the way, fixes 95% of whatever bugs are present in an un-SP'd install of 2K.

It may cost more, but you won't have nearly the headaches you have with 98SE (BSoDs, random crashes for no reason, etc), and you will have the stability of NT4. I would NEVER go back to 98SE, and even after using XP for about 2 months, I went back to 2K. It does everything that I need it to do in an OS without fail.

I just read all of the previous reviews, including the one from the FreeBSD Geek. I was not paid by Microsoft for this glowing review. In fact, I used to hate Microsoft. So much so that for over two years I ran IBM OS/2 Warp (3.0 and 4.0) on my previous machine. Oh, and I am a home user. I don't use computers at work at all.

That said, I have a few comments to make before getting into my own opinions about Win2k. About drivers. Microsoft has provided so many drivers for so many devices with their other OSes that people have come to expect this as a matter of course. But, as anyone (FreeBSD geek included) who has ever set up a non-Microsoft system can tell you, finding drivers for your computer can be difficult. Microsoft did an outstanding job in this area with Win2k. They went out of their way to provide a utility for you to test your system's Win2k compatibility before you fork out the bucks. Use it. Then carefully plan your upgrade.

I titled this review "The Best OS For Home Use", while several others warn home users to steer clear of Win2k. Well, in my experience, Win2k does not crash, ever. I do not have to reboot, ever. That means I don't have to think much about the software that runs my computer. Most home users would prefer to never have to do that.

As a consequence I am forced to actually use my computer to...do something. I run Excel to do my finances, surf the Web with up to 20 windows open at a time, edit graphics files in Paint Shop Pro, and write occasional letters in Word. I do not play games on my computer.

My brother, on the other hand, has three sons and a wife. They all share the same computer and internet connection (if AOL can be called the internet) with Win95. His hard drive is packed with MP3's because his older son spends hours downloading them. He has no room left for more data files, let alone software. When his computer starts there are several error messages because of missing files.

Win2k requires each user to log on with a user name and password. Each user has a quota of disk space allocated to them. And system files are protected from curious little users who wonder what would happen if they delete command.com (cmd.exe in Win2k).

The system is also protected from users who think it would be cool to load every piece of software known to Kiddom. Only someone with administrator rights can do that.

For those who are paranoid about others prying into their files, each user can encrypt his or her own. And for parents who want to keep their wayward sons and daughters from getting on the internet while they are still at work, anyone's user account can be disabled and re-enabled at any time.

None of these features was included with home use in mind. They are all intended to keep wayward employees from trashing corporate machines. Yet they are perfect for home use. Add to it the stability I have experienced with Windows 2000 and you have an unbeatable OS for your home computer.

As a registered OEM system builder with Microsoft, I was invited and attended the introduction of W2000 Pro. A lot of Microsoft staff was there. One quick note is that there were two types of staff. One wore red shirts, and the others wore blue shirts. The whole day seminar/presentation started with an explanation of, "If you have a technical question, ask one of the Microsoft staff in a red shirt, if you have a sales or marketing question, ask a blue shirt". I got a charge out of that. Sales people are enamored with what the software can do for you, and the technical staff is enamored in how it can do it.
What I really wanted to share with you is the major difference between W2000 and 98; In W2000 the system files are off bounds by different programs regarding, not being able to modify them for each program. In 98, that doesn't hold true. If a change needs to be made to a system file, then the outside software manufacturer can do it. The only help is that you can run system file checker in 98 to check for modified system files, and correct them.
What W2000 does is amazing. Not only can an outside manufacturer not be able to change system files, if you go in and delete a system file, then exit out of the folder, then go back in, sure enough the system file you just deleted was automatically restored when you exited out of the folder.

Another point I wanted to make; the overwhelming advantage of using W2000 over XP when installing in an older machine is that it is compatible with a lot of the older hardware.
Here is the problem: You install XP, and up comes a warning that your hardware is not compatible, or needs drivers loaded in order to work. The manufacturers on the other hand, made your older component, whether it is a sound card, or video card, long before XP arrived, so they never created software drivers for it to run in XP. Nor do they want to spend the resources, to create drivers for a product that they stopped manufacturing 6 years ago. You have to check with the individual components to see if drivers are available for XP before buying it, or replace components. The advantage with W2000 is that you are getting the reliability, and the older hardware (within reason) compatibility.
XP is built on the Windows 2000 platform.
I just built a new machine, so I installed XP Pro on it, and I also picked up a copy of W2000 from an independent seller here at Amazon, and loaded it on my AMD K62-500 for the network. Although I did have one video card that didn't have a W2000 driver, so I changed that very inexpensively with a great 128meg video card on sale with rebates for $29. So my old machines that were built in 1999 run W2000 great. No more programs freeze when several programs are open at the same time. You can leave a machine sitting for a couple of hours and not have it respond poorly when you come back to it, and have to reboot. No more blue screen error reports, having to reboot and run scan disk.
On my new XP machine, I had a bad program loaded, and when would run it, I would get a millisecond error screen, with an instant shut down, then it would reboot without having to run scan disk. I am assuming that since you can't mess with system files, no errors are created. I removed the program, which was a Mickey mouse add on included with a hardware bundle.
Windows 2000 pro rocks. Highly recommended.

In March, 2000, I bought a Compaq computer with Windows 98-SE preinstalled. It worked fine for about a month. Then the crashes and blue screens of death started to rear their ugly heads. Finally, in November, I decided to install Windows 2000. Since I installed this operating system and got my hardware working with the new operating system, I have not had ANY CRASHES. If an application starts generating errors, the system will close it without freezing up. My cable internet connection is a lot faster with Windows 2000. For installation, I would strongly recommend erasing the hard drive and installing a clean copy of Win 2000, rather than "upgrading." I would not only recommend this operating system for business users, but also for home users.

Well if this product determines whether Microsoft will sink or swim, then I have no doubts that they will be floating so high in the water you could almost mistake them for a giant flying ship. This product is, (even in my critical words) one of the best products Microsoft has released. However, If you are currently running Windows NT 4 with the latest service pack, then don't buy this product just yet. My advice is to hold back a while, there will undoubtedly be a slightly improved version released in a few months, plus it will give the industry time to develop better support for this product, Drivers etc. Windows 2000 currently provides little more than NT4 so unless you are doing a new installation I would say at this time Windows 2000 is no more than a novelty rather than a great improvement or necessity.