Should one migrate from 2000 to XP? Thread poster: Mats Wiman
|
|---|
Mats Wiman 
Sweden
Local time: 23:36
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam
Dear all,
Being satisfied with Windows 2000 and Office 2000, can you, who know, tell me if there are any benefits in upgrading.
Best regards
Mats J C Wiman
Übersetzer/Translator/Traducteur/Traductor > swe
http://www.MatsWiman.com
http://www.Deutsch-Schwedisch.com... See more Dear all,
Being satisfied with Windows 2000 and Office 2000, can you, who know, tell me if there are any benefits in upgrading.
Best regards
Mats J C Wiman
Übersetzer/Translator/Traducteur/Traductor > swe
http://www.MatsWiman.com
http://www.Deutsch-Schwedisch.com
http://www.proz.com/pro/1749
(Proz.com moderator, deu>swe, Swedish)
Träsk 201
SE-872 97 Skog
Schweden/Sweden/Suède/Suecia
Tel:+46-612-54112 Fax:+46-612-54181 Mobile:+46-70-5769797
[email protected] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Hirschmann (X)
Local time: 23:36
English to German
+ ...
| Heinrich Pesch
Finland
Local time: 00:36
Member (2003)
Finnish to German
+ ...
| Only when buying a new machine | Jan 7, 2005 |
If you are satisfied with what you have, don't switch. I really do not see any advantage in XP vs. 2000. The registration-system is infuriating.
Regards
Heinrich
| | | | Félicien Sirois
United States
Local time: 16:36
Member
Italian to English
+ ...
About a year ago I switched to XP and was immediately blown away by the results.
I too fell in love with 2000 and really hated the thought of the upgrade but did it upon the recommendation of a friend who works in IT when I installed a larger hard drive.
The XP system is much more user-friendly and I feel that it is actually more stable than 2000. Programs still crash (as they did with 2000), but the recovery is much quicker and smoother now.
Plus, there ar... See more About a year ago I switched to XP and was immediately blown away by the results.
I too fell in love with 2000 and really hated the thought of the upgrade but did it upon the recommendation of a friend who works in IT when I installed a larger hard drive.
The XP system is much more user-friendly and I feel that it is actually more stable than 2000. Programs still crash (as they did with 2000), but the recovery is much quicker and smoother now.
Plus, there are so many new bells and whistles that can really help a person tweak their unit to their liking. This streamlines the work environment.
Installing new hardware is seamless. Many functions that required personal attention regarding with 2000 are simply handled by XP without a second thought.
Networking is simpler, as well as remote access and the system is generally easier to navigate. XP also seems far more proficient in handling foreign language matters (not to mention other XP-oriented language products such as Proofing Tools), although I only work with European languages so I haven't fully tested this theory...
But that's just my opinion
Felicien
[Edited at 2005-01-07 02:47] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| Switch to XP rather today than tomorrow | Jan 7, 2005 |
Hi Mats,
I can only echo what Felicien says. I am definitely not a computer expert (more of an an autodidact trying out different things on computer that I need for my work), *but* it's a fact that XP is much more stable than Win 2000. NB: The first XP version had not so few bugs, I admit, but nowadays it works very fine.
Thinking back to the time when I still used Win 2000, I won't forget the daily 5-6 blue screens, frozen software etc. To compare with XP, I haven't h... See more Hi Mats,
I can only echo what Felicien says. I am definitely not a computer expert (more of an an autodidact trying out different things on computer that I need for my work), *but* it's a fact that XP is much more stable than Win 2000. NB: The first XP version had not so few bugs, I admit, but nowadays it works very fine.
Thinking back to the time when I still used Win 2000, I won't forget the daily 5-6 blue screens, frozen software etc. To compare with XP, I haven't had one single blue screen in XP for two years now. So I'm very satisfied.
The next question is of course if you would like to keep you your old computer and replace Win 2000 with XP. This could cause problems due to lack of memory etc. In any case I would recommend a new computer if you think of packing your suitcases and migrate to XP
Vänliga hälsningar
Erik
**********************************
Erik Hansson
Technical translator DE-SE
Hansson Übersetzungen GmbH
Am Birkenwäldchen 38
D-01900 Bretnig-Hauswalde, Germany
Phone +49 - 3 59 52 - 321 07
Fax +49 - 3 59 52 - 322 02
E-Mail [email protected]
Internet www.hansson.de
Internet www.t-translators.net
Internet www.technical-translators.net
ProZ profile http://www.proz.com/pro/21654
***********************************
[Edited at 2005-01-07 08:45] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Jerzy Czopik
Germany
Local time: 23:36
Member (2003)
Polish to German
+ ...
| If you buy a new machine, upgrade, otherwise stay where you are | Jan 7, 2005 |
XP is more resources consuming, so if the machine is a bit older, I wouldn´t upgrade today. However, I did this in the past and never regretted this decision.
But if you managed to keep at this level until now, so then stay where you are and wait until the new 64 bit technology comes.
If your Windows and Office do hang at least once a week, then I would consider upgrading - Windows XP and Office XP do hang some once every six month or so...
Upgrading Office, however, I wouldn�... See more XP is more resources consuming, so if the machine is a bit older, I wouldn´t upgrade today. However, I did this in the past and never regretted this decision.
But if you managed to keep at this level until now, so then stay where you are and wait until the new 64 bit technology comes.
If your Windows and Office do hang at least once a week, then I would consider upgrading - Windows XP and Office XP do hang some once every six month or so...
Upgrading Office, however, I wouldn´t go for Office XP, but I would take the latest Office 2003 instead.
Currently I work with WinXP/Office XP and would never switch back... (btw I have all Service Packs installed - both for Windows and Office - and it works very well, despite what a lot other people say).
Regards
Jerzy ▲ Collapse
| | | | Parrot
Spain
Local time: 23:36
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Hardware sometimes forces you to stay where you are | Jan 7, 2005 |
Computers at home work on 2 main areas: visuals and translations. Good, stable graphic hardware moves rather slowly.
So there was a time when I was sharing space with 3 other computers, 1 of them on XP. The other one was 2000, the best OS for managing the DPS graphic card (it's still around).
The one that was scrapped (and partner still cries about it) was Windows 98, which managed the Miró graphic card. No way it could migrate to 2000 with satisfactory results. DPS wo... See more Computers at home work on 2 main areas: visuals and translations. Good, stable graphic hardware moves rather slowly.
So there was a time when I was sharing space with 3 other computers, 1 of them on XP. The other one was 2000, the best OS for managing the DPS graphic card (it's still around).
The one that was scrapped (and partner still cries about it) was Windows 98, which managed the Miró graphic card. No way it could migrate to 2000 with satisfactory results. DPS won out in the end because of its capacity for editing longer video clips. But Miró gave a somewhat better resolution with no horizontal distorsion, which was great for extracting stills.
It's not a cut-and-dried decision, I'm afraid, Mats. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | To upgrade or not to upgrade.... | Jan 7, 2005 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
Dear all,
Being satisfied with Windows 2000 and Office 2000, can you, who know, tell me if there are any benefits in upgrading.
Dear Mats,
I have been in technical support and software engineering, chiefly on the Microsoft platform for a decade now, and have watched upgrades all the way from Windows 1.0. Although I could easily wax long on this issue, I'll try to be brief.
First, I believe in old adages, and "If it isn't broke, don't fix it" is one that I am fond of repeating.
Second, I've noticed some posts indicating that some poeple in your profession (translating) have been experiencing problems with specialized software that you use when upgrading from one version of Windows to the next (the specifics escape me at this time, but this is not unusual in any way.) In broad terms I would say that most software that works in 2000 "should" work in XP, but I would definately attempt to verify that all of the software you need will work in XP.
That said, I was very fond of 2000 as a software development platform, it was the most stable to that date, in my opinion. In spite of that, I have upgraded to XP partly out of necessity (programmer's are required to keep up with times) and partly out of curiousity. With what I do, I'm very happy with XP--it is every bit as stable as 2000, if not more, and its interface is a bit cleaner, and its hardware support is better. The less time I have to spend in the Device Manager, the happier I am.
Without a more in-depth interview, and making a million assumptions as to who you are and what you do, I would make the following recommendations based on which description fits you better:
-----------------UPGRADE IF------------------
you are frequently buying new printers because their increased ppm rate and the improved clarity of their output is important to your business, and you are frequently buying new computer hardware because you feel it is important to keep up with technology (i.e., your current computer's CPU is at least a Pentium 1.2 GHZ, and has 256 MB or more of RAM),
------------------AND-----------------
all of the software that is critical to your business will continue to work (or can be upgraded to continue to work) when you upgrade to XP. Then I would feel you would benefit from upgrading.
-----------------USE 2000 IF-------------------
your software and hardware are working fine for you, and you are not caught up in the latest gadgetry craze. An example I use a lot is: "If you are using your PC for a word processor, and your system is dependable, you shouldn't have to feel compelled to buy the latest and greatest--an old XT with 640K of RAM and a 20MB HD can do that with perfect ease, and already the leading Word Processors (i.e. Word or WordPerfect had everything most of us ever need in a word processor.)
Sorry, this is already longer than I wanted to wax,
Ross
and you don't have any expensive, special-purpose software that
| | |
|
|
|
| Send your money to the tsunami victims; they need it more than Bill! | Jan 8, 2005 |
[Edited at 2005-01-08 18:39]
| | | | PAS
Local time: 23:36
Polish to English
+ ...
| A little beside.... | Jan 20, 2005 |
I have been using Win2K for a few years now and have never found reason to complain. I don't ever recall a BSD. Soooo, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
But I would switch to a newer version of Office, because there has been a big leap in stability of that aniaml between 2000 and XP/2003.
The only thing Win2K does not have that XP does (or I don't know how to do it) is the "quick switch between logged in users" feature. In Win2K you need to shut down all the applications... See more I have been using Win2K for a few years now and have never found reason to complain. I don't ever recall a BSD. Soooo, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
But I would switch to a newer version of Office, because there has been a big leap in stability of that aniaml between 2000 and XP/2003.
The only thing Win2K does not have that XP does (or I don't know how to do it) is the "quick switch between logged in users" feature. In Win2K you need to shut down all the applications, log out and then log in again.
In XP it's one click and all your applications stay open.
Pawel Skalinski ▲ Collapse
| | | | Horst2
Local time: 23:36
English to German
+ ...
| Tell us what you did! | Jan 21, 2005 |
Hi Mats,
a decision that has to be made, apart from the bits and bytes, becomes apparent:
1) if it's not broken don't fix it / invest only if it pays off for sure / avoid risk / etc.
or
2) follow the technical development / make part of the new world / take risk in order to stay in business / etc.
Tell us what you decided.
Regards,
Horst
| | | | Mario Marcolin
Sweden
Local time: 23:36
Member (2003)
English to Swedish
+ ...
| to XP or not XP | Feb 1, 2005 |
Hi Mats,
Windows XP does come with an interface that is more user-friendly, on the other hand the registry often degenerates spontaneously. You will need to tune the registry on a regular basis - otherwise XP becomes *very* unstable.
If you choose to XP - do also get some good tuning utility.
All the best,
Mario
| | |
|
|
|
Jerzy Czopik
Germany
Local time: 23:36
Member (2003)
Polish to German
+ ...
| To XP with all means! | Feb 1, 2005 |
Mario Marcolin wrote: Hi Mats, Windows XP does come with an interface that is more user-friendly, on the other hand the registry often degenerates spontaneously. You will need to tune the registry on a regular basis - otherwise XP becomes *very* unstable. If you choose to XP - do also get some good tuning utility. All the best, Mario
Well, never heard about WinXP becoming "unstable" and "registry, which often degenerates spontaneously".
I´m lucky in using XP since more than two years on all machines - they are not unstable in any way, nor does the registry change itself without any ingerence. Yes, XP can become unstable - if one does, what one should not do: installing aroud software just for testing purposes.
In my experience you do not need to be a computer guru to get WinXP run stable. Just install it as it comes, install the proper drivers and then you go. Some fine tuning is allways welcomed, but not absolutly necessary.
Grabbing in registry, however, is something one should avoid, unless you know VERY good what you are doing. If WinXP becomes unstable AFTER a registry ingerence from a user, so mostly he is the cause for the trouble
Regards
Jerzy
| | | | | Excel search function | Feb 18, 2005 |
It's worth it to upgrade if only for the Excel search function, which is day and night compared with the infuriating search function in Excel 2000.
It allows you to search through the entire workbook, by rows or columns, inside formulas and comments, as well as making it possible to search for specific formats.
If you do a lot of work with Excel or if your clients send you glossaries in Excel format, this is a life-saver.
Marc Adler
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Should one migrate from 2000 to XP? | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
| | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
