Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Windows 200 outperforms Windows XP

Windows 200 outperforms Windows XP

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
comxmlperformancequestioncode-review
24 Posts 13 Posters 1 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A Anna Jayne Metcalfe

    I read this on the W2K Mailing List yesterday. I expect it's embarrassing news for Microsoft, but we shouldn't be surprised, when you consider the UI changes. I'd be surprised if the XP Kernel itself was slower than the 2000 Kernel. Andy Metcalfe - Sonardyne International Ltd

    Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Add-In for Visual C++ 5.0/6.0
    "I'm just another 'S' bend in the internet. A ton of stuff goes through my system, and some of the hairer, stickier and lumpier stuff sticks." - Chris Maunder (I just couldn't let that one past ;))

    _ Offline
    _ Offline
    _Magnus_
    wrote on last edited by
    #4

    As i understood it they used automated test tools, i find it hard to belive the UI changes whould affect them if they are not design to test the UI. /Magnus

    T S 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • _ _Magnus_

      As i understood it they used automated test tools, i find it hard to belive the UI changes whould affect them if they are not design to test the UI. /Magnus

      T Offline
      T Offline
      Tim Smith
      wrote on last edited by
      #5

      All the tests were about UI. But it still doesn't change the fact that it looks very bad. *Slaps MS around some* Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.

      _ 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • T Tim Smith

        All the tests were about UI. But it still doesn't change the fact that it looks very bad. *Slaps MS around some* Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.

        _ Offline
        _ Offline
        _Magnus_
        wrote on last edited by
        #6

        Ok, i didnt read it that carefully then. I tought the test where mainly about multitasking. /Magnus

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • _ _Magnus_

          http://www.infoworld.com/articles/tc/xml/01/10/29/011029tcwinxp.xml Kind of "fun" since they recently presented a list of changes to the kernel that should improve performance. Dont they test what they do? /Magnus

          E Offline
          E Offline
          ed welch
          wrote on last edited by
          #7

          Microsoft marketing blurb = "XYX is faster" Translation = "One tiny feature of XYZ is faster, but the bulk of it is just as slow as previous version" In the case of Windows XP it's the boot-up time that is faster.:)

          _ 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • E ed welch

            Microsoft marketing blurb = "XYX is faster" Translation = "One tiny feature of XYZ is faster, but the bulk of it is just as slow as previous version" In the case of Windows XP it's the boot-up time that is faster.:)

            _ Offline
            _ Offline
            _Magnus_
            wrote on last edited by
            #8

            I tought they might actually had improved, i think they have done a real good job with W2000, and finally dumping the crap OS'es 95,98,ME is another good thing. But maybe they are back to the old habits of spending 99% of the development on flashy UI's again. /Magnus

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • _ _Magnus_

              http://www.infoworld.com/articles/tc/xml/01/10/29/011029tcwinxp.xml Kind of "fun" since they recently presented a list of changes to the kernel that should improve performance. Dont they test what they do? /Magnus

              N Offline
              N Offline
              Nish Nishant
              wrote on last edited by
              #9

              Hmmm Somehow I have this feeling that Win 2000 is the last MS OS a lot of people are gonna use. Somehow I feel a lot of the techies at least might stay with Win 2K for a couple of years more and then move over to Gnome and KDE both of which would have matured enough by then. Somehow I feel XP has started off so bad, nobody wants to install it.

              realJSOPR H S T 4 Replies Last reply
              0
              • N Nish Nishant

                Hmmm Somehow I have this feeling that Win 2000 is the last MS OS a lot of people are gonna use. Somehow I feel a lot of the techies at least might stay with Win 2K for a couple of years more and then move over to Gnome and KDE both of which would have matured enough by then. Somehow I feel XP has started off so bad, nobody wants to install it.

                realJSOPR Offline
                realJSOPR Offline
                realJSOP
                wrote on last edited by
                #10

                As far as I can see (speaking as a Win2k user), there's no "gotta-have" features in XP. Moving from Win31 to Win95 was pretty much a no-brainer. Win98 offered a better plug-n-play capability and USB support. Win2k offered no-reboot network support, NT reliability, and DirectX support. ME offered nothing to existing Win95/98 users, and XP offers nothing to existing Win2K users. "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

                C N 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • realJSOPR realJSOP

                  As far as I can see (speaking as a Win2k user), there's no "gotta-have" features in XP. Moving from Win31 to Win95 was pretty much a no-brainer. Win98 offered a better plug-n-play capability and USB support. Win2k offered no-reboot network support, NT reliability, and DirectX support. ME offered nothing to existing Win95/98 users, and XP offers nothing to existing Win2K users. "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

                  C Offline
                  C Offline
                  Caleb Groom
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #11

                  Couldnt have said it better myself. I think that if people are still running 98 and long for some stability they should move to XP. But...can computers running 98 (from 2-3 years ago) handle XP? Not with 64 megs they cant. __________________________ do { cout << "I will never use = when I mean == " << endl; } while (i = 1)

                  A 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • C Caleb Groom

                    Couldnt have said it better myself. I think that if people are still running 98 and long for some stability they should move to XP. But...can computers running 98 (from 2-3 years ago) handle XP? Not with 64 megs they cant. __________________________ do { cout << "I will never use = when I mean == " << endl; } while (i = 1)

                    A Offline
                    A Offline
                    Anna Jayne Metcalfe
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #12

                    True, but memory is real cheap at the moment. If we hadn't upgraded our desktop machine at home (AMD K6-450 with 192MB RAM) to Win2k 6 months ago I'd be seriously considering it; as it is, the only thing in XP which would be tempting for us is Fast User Switching. Andy Metcalfe - Sonardyne International Ltd

                    Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Add-In for Visual C++ 5.0/6.0
                    "I'm just another 'S' bend in the internet. A ton of stuff goes through my system, and some of the hairer, stickier and lumpier stuff sticks." - Chris Maunder (I just couldn't let that one past ;))

                    C 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • N Nish Nishant

                      Hmmm Somehow I have this feeling that Win 2000 is the last MS OS a lot of people are gonna use. Somehow I feel a lot of the techies at least might stay with Win 2K for a couple of years more and then move over to Gnome and KDE both of which would have matured enough by then. Somehow I feel XP has started off so bad, nobody wants to install it.

                      H Offline
                      H Offline
                      Henry Jacobs
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #13

                      This is exactly how I feel. It's kind of sad. I am really comfortable with Windows programming. A year or two from now I will have to uproot and plant myself in xwindow programming, but good programming skills are platform independant. :)

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • _ _Magnus_

                        As i understood it they used automated test tools, i find it hard to belive the UI changes whould affect them if they are not design to test the UI. /Magnus

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        Steven Hicks n 1
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #14

                        The UI can affect a program bady, as the case with WinXP. That is why 404Browser is not focused on a fancy UI like WinXP has. -Steven Visit Ltpb.8m.com Surf the web faster than ever: http://www.404Browser.com

                        L 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • S Steven Hicks n 1

                          The UI can affect a program bady, as the case with WinXP. That is why 404Browser is not focused on a fancy UI like WinXP has. -Steven Visit Ltpb.8m.com Surf the web faster than ever: http://www.404Browser.com

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          loket
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #15

                          Are you saying that we should run 404Browser instead of WinXP??

                          S N 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • L loket

                            Are you saying that we should run 404Browser instead of WinXP??

                            S Offline
                            S Offline
                            Steven Hicks n 1
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #16

                            What i am saying is that, for an application to run faster it should not have a fancy GUI. -Steven Download 404Browser Today! (note this link will download 404Browser) Visit Ltpb.8m.com Surf the web faster than ever: http://www.404Browser.com

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • A Anna Jayne Metcalfe

                              True, but memory is real cheap at the moment. If we hadn't upgraded our desktop machine at home (AMD K6-450 with 192MB RAM) to Win2k 6 months ago I'd be seriously considering it; as it is, the only thing in XP which would be tempting for us is Fast User Switching. Andy Metcalfe - Sonardyne International Ltd

                              Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Add-In for Visual C++ 5.0/6.0
                              "I'm just another 'S' bend in the internet. A ton of stuff goes through my system, and some of the hairer, stickier and lumpier stuff sticks." - Chris Maunder (I just couldn't let that one past ;))

                              C Offline
                              C Offline
                              Caleb Groom
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #17

                              I agree. I just ordered a gig of memory from crucial. :-D For some reason (maybe its the people that I know) I can see people buying XP and installing it over (arg..) their current OS. No consideration to if the computer hardware needs improvement was well. Fast user switching: Probably the only reason I will evenually install it on my parents computer. They have 2 kids at home still. Looks to be a cool feature. __________________________ do { cout << "I will never use = when I mean == " << endl; } while (i = 1)

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • N Nish Nishant

                                Hmmm Somehow I have this feeling that Win 2000 is the last MS OS a lot of people are gonna use. Somehow I feel a lot of the techies at least might stay with Win 2K for a couple of years more and then move over to Gnome and KDE both of which would have matured enough by then. Somehow I feel XP has started off so bad, nobody wants to install it.

                                S Offline
                                S Offline
                                Steven Hicks n 1
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #18

                                I have seen all the features in WinXP before in Linux. Also Linux is more stable, and has most of the bugs worked out already -Steven Download 404Browser Today! (note this link will download 404Browser) Visit Ltpb.8m.com Surf the web faster than ever: http://www.404Browser.com

                                realJSOPR 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • S Steven Hicks n 1

                                  I have seen all the features in WinXP before in Linux. Also Linux is more stable, and has most of the bugs worked out already -Steven Download 404Browser Today! (note this link will download 404Browser) Visit Ltpb.8m.com Surf the web faster than ever: http://www.404Browser.com

                                  realJSOPR Offline
                                  realJSOPR Offline
                                  realJSOP
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #19

                                  Linux is neither more buggy, nor less buggy, than Windows. "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • N Nish Nishant

                                    Hmmm Somehow I have this feeling that Win 2000 is the last MS OS a lot of people are gonna use. Somehow I feel a lot of the techies at least might stay with Win 2K for a couple of years more and then move over to Gnome and KDE both of which would have matured enough by then. Somehow I feel XP has started off so bad, nobody wants to install it.

                                    T Offline
                                    T Offline
                                    Tim Smith
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #20

                                    LOL, Nobody wants to install it? Mark my words, in another year or two people will be saying "w2k? Damn, why haven't you installed XP already." People were saying the same thing about w2k and NT4. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • _ _Magnus_

                                      http://www.infoworld.com/articles/tc/xml/01/10/29/011029tcwinxp.xml Kind of "fun" since they recently presented a list of changes to the kernel that should improve performance. Dont they test what they do? /Magnus

                                      W Offline
                                      W Offline
                                      William De Pretre
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #21

                                      Even more fun is that they are the only ones to report a decrease in performance. I didn't make a study of it but I noticed an increased performance in several applications (comparison between clean Win98,Win2K and WinXP) using WinXP. Maybe it is a new disease that forces journalists to badmouth MS instead. Witness several articles about Amazon implying that they dumped Windows in favor of Linux whereas they replaced their Unix system with Linux. :suss:

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • _ _Magnus_

                                        http://www.infoworld.com/articles/tc/xml/01/10/29/011029tcwinxp.xml Kind of "fun" since they recently presented a list of changes to the kernel that should improve performance. Dont they test what they do? /Magnus

                                        E Offline
                                        E Offline
                                        Erik Funkenbusch
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #22

                                        I'm rather skeptical of this test. My own personal experience has been otherwise. Their particular test cases may have been slower, but I think this test primarily tests interactive tasks which, so long as they are faster than a human can perform will not be noticeably slower. The new GUI is slower in some ways. The alpha blending and skining do use more CPU time than previous versions of Windows. Luckily, you can disable it if the speed is that important to you. -- Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • L loket

                                          Are you saying that we should run 404Browser instead of WinXP??

                                          N Offline
                                          N Offline
                                          Neville Franks
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #23

                                          I think he's saying we shouldn't use the 404Browser because it doesn't have a proper GUI:-D Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows. Version 4.01 just released, with a C++ Class View that actually works. www.getsoft.com

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups