Advice on buying a copy of XP please

O

Operaghost

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
1,315
I want to finally get a copy of my own. My computer is on a small home network thats on a cable connection. My computer is used ONLY for gaming and web browsing.
Questions:

1. Would there be any large advantages to getting Professional over Home edition?
2. Would there be any downfalls to getting it OEM? Newegg has a good price on them right now so I'd like to jump on it if there shouldn't be a problem with OEM?
 
I'd go pro because it lets you format the system partition as NTFS. I've only seen XP Home give you the choice of FAT32.
 
Personally I don't want NTFS. I don't see any benefits other than security, and I'm not paranoid enough about my game files being hacked to see NTFS as a must have.
 
Operaghost said:
Personally I don't want NTFS. I don't see any benefits other than security, and I'm not paranoid enough about my game files being hacked to see NTFS as a must have.
Click to expand...

So I guess the speed increase and ability to recover from a crash just aren't worth it to you?
 
Could you please explain or link an explanation of how NTFS is faster than FAT32?
I'm not calling you a liar. I'm not a professional, just an enthusiast and would like to educate myself.
 
Operaghost said:
Could you please explain or link an explanation of how NTFS is faster than FAT32?
I'm not calling you a liar. I'm not a professional, just an enthusiast and would like to educate myself.
Click to expand...


There have been quite a few tests that show NTFS drives are slightly faster. Probably do to a more efficient fie structure. I've done some of my own tests using two ghost images, one of FAT32 and one of NTFS to see, and NTFS was always slighty faster.

Another benefit is the ability of NTFS to better handle system crashes. Often, when I system crashes, it leaves some corrupted files. Not so in NTFS.

Cinsidering the fact you can have DOS access to an NTFS drive if you install the recovery console, there's no reason NOT to go NTFS.
 
Its a lot more money for pro and I'm not Mr. Moneybags so if I can save myself 100-150 dollars and not lose any major performance/features then I'll do it.
 
I get my licenses through HP for $20, but I've seen full XP Pro CDs, one license, no activation, for $94 at computer shows. If you work for a large company that has site licenses from Microsoft....check, you may be able to get stuff cheap. I pay $20 for the CD and license for any MS product.
 
djnes said:
I'd go pro because it lets you format the system partition as NTFS. I've only seen XP Home give you the choice of FAT32.
Click to expand...

XP home supports NTFS. I don't know how you are formatting, but XP home does do NTFS. I would buy home for what you want. You can always upgrade to pro later, if you feel you need it.
 
OEM copies of Windows XP become activated and tied to the original machine they are installed to. In other words you cant transfer the OEM copy from one computer to another.

Windows XP Home supports NTFS, its basically more geared to home users. Personally i purchased home because the pro edition offered nothing id really want.
As far as functionality and compatability goes, they're essentially the same OS. Microsofts website lists the differances in detail.
 
3 things, really :


  1. If you're planning on doing any web development, then go Pro - Home doesn't support IIS (assuming you'll be doing MS style development - ASP or ASP.NET). There is a hack to get it working, but it's not a wonderful solution at best.
  2. If you've got a dually rig, Home doesn't support SMP.
  3. If you're running on a domain, you can't use Home to authenticate to the domain/active directory.
Also, I'm sure I saw somewhere that Home has a memory limit - something along the lines of 512MB usable, regardless of whether you have more (like the old limit on Win9x), although I can't subtantiate this right now.
 
Ranma_Sao said:
XP home supports NTFS. I don't know how you are formatting, but XP home does do NTFS. I would buy home for what you want. You can always upgrade to pro later, if you feel you need it.
Click to expand...


Every copy of XP Home I've ever used comes up with the choices of FAT32 and FAT32 (quick). It was, at one time, well documented on the comparison matrix on MS's site.
 
Right here is the newest matrix. It's been updated quite a bit, but it states that to use NTFS, you need Pro. Both versions of home will read NTFS disks, but Pro only supports native formatting to NTFS for the system volume.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/choosing2.mspx

Oh, and no one mentioned it yet, but I tend to use the Remote Desktop feature quite a bit, since it's built in to Pro and Win2003 Server.
 
What you using right now? I mean why dont you consider Windows 2000 Pro over Windows XP home?

OldMX
 
djnes said:
Right here is the newest matrix. It's been updated quite a bit, but it states that to use NTFS, you need Pro. Both versions of home will read NTFS disks, but Pro only supports native formatting to NTFS for the system volume.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/choosing2.mspx

Oh, and no one mentioned it yet, but I tend to use the Remote Desktop feature quite a bit, since it's built in to Pro and Win2003 Server.
Click to expand...

From one who installs home almost 20 times a day, I can guarantee it supports the system volume being ntfs. And in fact is encouraged by Microsoft to be NTFS. EFS is only supported on Pro, But I seriously doubt any home user needs EFS.

And for the crack about costs, you pay 50 bucks for a game but complain about 150 bucks for an O/S you use non-stop? ;)
 
RancidWAnnaRIot said:
All i have to say is that it's a damn shame Microsoft OSes cost too much.. >=\
Click to expand...

and Apple doesn't? for all the incremental upgrades that Mac does (and still charges for it) i'd be about 360.00 poorer than I am now.

cheers,

Dave Graham
 
:LJ: said:
Also, I'm sure I saw somewhere that Home has a memory limit - something along the lines of 512MB usable, regardless of whether you have more (like the old limit on Win9x), although I can't subtantiate this right now.
Click to expand...

Dont know were you heard that from because I am using almost 1.5gigs of ram right now.
 
Bio Hazord said:
Dont know were you heard that from because I am using almost 1.5gigs of ram right now.
Click to expand...

Home doesn't support /PAE kernels, it only supports up to 4GB of memory. Home isn't that crippled guys.
 
For someone looking to just play games and isn't interested in "playing" with the features of Pro, such as Remote Desktop or EFS, Home is a great choice. It won't hinder you in any way.
 
if you ever get a mulitprocessor or HT-enabled system you wont be able to use it with home
 
XP Home supports up to 4GB of RAM and can use NTFS. It also can take advantage of HT processors.
 
djnes, in the link you provided, the only mention of NTFS is here:

Encrypting File System - protects sensitive data in files that are stored on disk using the NTFS file system.

But that is EFS, not NTFS, which 99.999% of home users will never need.

I don't play around with home much at all, but I'm pretty sure it supports NTFS, otherwise 2k users upgrading to XP home would be screwed.

In this case, home is probably better.
 
Things you can do in XP Home:
  • Install and play games.
  • Surf the web and check e-mail.
  • Run all office programs (Word, Outlook, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, OOo, WordPerfect, etc.).
  • Install and run a TV tuner and software.
  • Watch DVDs.
  • Listen to CDs.
  • Work on a compiler and IDE for a programming hobby or work.
  • Use other multimedia development tools, like Macromedia's suite, Photoshop/Premiere, Sonic Foundry's tools, and more.
  • Share files between computers.
  • The list goes on...

What you cannot do in XP Home:
  • Use the MS Encrypted File System.
  • Join a network domain.
  • Run a Remote Desktop server (an RD client is available for all Win versions).
  • Feel falsely superior to those running XP Home because you are running something with the word "professional" on it, as if it means you are a better computer user for it.

Here's another interesting fact: XP Home uses less services than XP Pro. Quack Viper tries to accomplish this by crippling a Pro version to make it more like Home, though he does it in a piss-poor and ineffective manner (you wind up losing capabilities instead of gaining performance). On the other hand, if these people were to have just bought XP Home in the first place, they would have achieved the lighter service load that Quack Viper tries to accomplish, but it would be accomplished in a way that keeps the system working at its fullest capabilities, for cheaper than buying the Pro version to begin with.

So ask yourself: do I run an Active Directory server in my home? do I plan on using Encrypted File System? do I plan on using my machine as a Remote Desktop server?

If you don't answer "yes" to these, then you most likely don't need XP Pro, and would be wasting your money buying the more expensive one. Don't listen to the misinformed who claim that Home is crippled in any way. It's not. It is simply not Pro—it has instead been tailored as a lighter, more home-use-based, and general-purpose version of Windows XP, while Pro is tailored for domain and higher-end business network use.

Use the right tool for the job. You wouldn't use a backhoe to plant small flowers in the backyard. You don't need a sledgehammer to put a small tack to hang a picture from in the wall. I sincerely hope you don't require a butcher's knife to spread butter on a slice of bread. ;)
 
O.F.Fascist said:
I suggest you not buy a copy. ;)
Click to expand...
=X

Probably a shot in the dark..... Opera are you a student? If you really need to buy XP and are a student get a copy through your school. Most schools offer it cheap. I dunno I never used them before, but I have read about others getting XP through their school for cheap.
 
I've had both on this rig and functions nearly identical. Most noticeable difference is group policy editor in pro. Pointless (almost) feature for most folks. More bloat to turn off in pro. The only benefit I get from pro, is that it believes ya when you make tons of registry tweaks. Home seemed to assume I was kidding, and reset to default. Home doesn't like having paging files on a short leash. Home is more than enough for single rigs.
 
Feel falsely superior to those running XP Home because you are running something with the word "professional" on it, as if it means you are a better computer user for it.
Click to expand...
But I AM superior, wuhahahahaha!!!

;)
 
Nem said:
=X
Probably a shot in the dark..... Opera are you a student? If you really need to buy XP and are a student get a copy through your school. Most schools offer it cheap. I dunno I never used them before, but I have read about others getting XP through their school for cheap.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about willis, I use XP Pro. ;)
 
GreNME said:
What are you talking about? Your nickname was picked after the name of a flaming bird!

;)
Click to expand...
Yes, a superior bird at that, AND if you kill it, it comes back!!! It should have been called Superbird, and it's not even vulnerable to Kryptonite, but I think they went with Phoenix because it's shorter...

:D

Phoenix_88.jpg
 
I was cringing seeing all this advice. Discrepancies abound. As he said, Home is perfectly fine if you are on a peer to peer network at home and don't use the FEW extras that Pro provides. Funny enough though? I'd still recommend Pro because if you ever end up wanting the extras (I use the Remote Desktop daily, plan on having two processors eventually) then its a hell of a lot more money to get plus you wasted the money you spent on Home. Just do it!
 
One more perspective. Consider the two like a car you can buy. You can choose the model with the cd player and the sun roof, or the one without. Its the exact same car, you just chose less options. Add a sun roof later? Many, many dollars and you really should have just got it the first time. I had a guy who actually thought Home should never be sold on a machine with a fast processor because all that speed would be wasted! He has been thoroughl slapped and is now serving penance for such a dumb notion. They are identical under the hood, its all about options.
 
It's my belief that if you don't know whether you need Home or Pro, you'll probably get along just fine with Home. I know lots of people who do, including myself.
 
Most people are fine with Home, so I agree with recommending its purchase for the stated usage.

I personally use Remote Desktop to log in to my computer remotely all the time, and for that feature alone I use Pro. It's proved its worth so very many times. The ability to access my computer, along with the data stored on it, from anywhere that has Internet access is invaluable.
 
OldPueblo said:
Funny enough though? I'd still recommend Pro because if you ever end up wanting the extras (I use the Remote Desktop daily, plan on having two processors eventually) then its a hell of a lot more money to get plus you wasted the money you spent on Home. Just do it!
Click to expand...
I use Pro on both my main workstation and my work laptop as well. However, the features of Pro are wasted on the desktop, while integral on the laptop. My only relief is that I didn't pay for the workstation OS.

But I agree with the Remote Desktop niceness, though. However, I disagree with the expensive part. RealVNC is a good solution for such situations where a remote desktop is the only feature desired and is going to be controlled by mainly one user. If a remote connection is the hard sell, there are still cheaper options than springing for Pro (not that I would say this is an all-out solution for everyone).
 
GreNME said:
...Here's another interesting fact: XP Home uses less services than XP Pro...
Click to expand...

Good point. I actually noticed a significant speed up during normal desktop operations between WIN2000 and XP Home. I would say get an OEM copy of XP Home and call it a day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top