- Memory usage of XP vs. 2000
- Posted by M.Siler on February 24th, 2004
I understand that XP Pro had less system requirments than 2000 but I've been
told that XP Pro uses more system (RAM, etc.) in reality. Does anyone know
if this is trully the case? I have a system that only has 192 MB of RAM and
I'm trying to figure out if I want to put on 2000 or XP Pro. On systems with
not much RAM with XP Pro I turn off the following services: Themes,
Wireless Zero Configuration and Indexing Service. Thoughts... Suggestions?
- Posted by purplehaz on February 24th, 2004
IMHO - Go with xp pro and buy more ram. Memory is cheap now-a-days. 256mb
would be the minimum, 512mb recommended.
M.Siler wrote:
- Posted by Al Dykes on February 24th, 2004
In article <udNGxev#DHA.2216@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>,
M.Siler <John.Doe@NoSpam.com> wrote:
memory's cheap these days, but 192 MB should be fine for MS Office, email,
and browsing.
Here's my list of services yoiu can disable on a home PC;
Automatic Updates
Messenger Service
TCP/IP Netbios Helper
Wireless Zero Config (unless have a WiFi adapter in the machine)
Upload Manager
Task Scheduler Server
Error Reporting
Remote Registery
Server Service
Computer Browser
In Control Panel there is is a performance tuning selection:
Start -> Control Panel > System -> Advanced
-> Performance -> Settings
Select "adjust for best performance"
Start->Properties Select "classsic" IMHO
--
Al Dykes
-----------
adykes@panix.com
- Posted by M.Siler on February 24th, 2004
Thanks for the list of additional services I can turn off. I also, do Start
But does anyone know if XP Pro is more of a memory hog than 2000?
"Al Dykes" <adykes@panix.com> wrote in message
news:c1g1es$djb$1@panix3.panix.com...
- Posted by Steve Nielsen on February 24th, 2004
M.Siler wrote:
Out of the box with default settings and services, yes.
Steve
- Posted by Bob I on February 24th, 2004
Simply compare the Minimum requirements for the 2 operating systems.
Win2K is about 1/2 that of XP.
M.Siler wrote:
