|
I am not much on "'nuff said" statements, but....
<i>2K is not bad, very stable.
XP is better, it has more to it.</i>
....seems to be dead on.
I took classes on w2k thinking it was going to replace nt, and, well, we know what happened there.
XP is smarter for pnp, (large .cab files), networks at the touch of a button, no more stacks, and "heals when wounded" nicely.
2000 was an excellent transition, for home users like me, from the semi-dos OS to the "I know nothing, just work dammit" computer.
XP just works without massive tutelage.
|