On Friday 20 August 2010 13:32:13 Simon Royal wrote: > Hi > I have been offered a new laptop - for free - and therefore will probably > sell my ThinkPad 240x. Before it goes I will wipe the hard drive and > reinstall an OS, simply because selling it without one will put a lot of > people off. But which one? It has a 2000 COA sticker underneath and a > 'Designed for Windows 2000' sticker on top. So which one would be better? > 2000 or XP? > Its a 500Mhz P3 model with 196MB RAM. > > Simon Royal > > > --- Twitter: http://twitter.com/SimonRoyal - LowEndMac: > http://tinyurl.com/macspectrum - Skype: Simon-Royal. --- IBM ThinkPad 240X > running Linux Mint 9 LXDE & Windows XP Home - Apple iBook G3 running OSX > 10.4.
Windows 2000 is actually a more stable system. It's also faster. But MS cut off all life-support for it--no more updates, at all. This means its only a matter of time before Win2K systems are going to be ripe for plunder. If you *never*, and I mean NEVER put the machine on the net, then Win2K is quite viable, except that there are now programs which specifically won't run on Win2K. So... WinXP is the better bet. XP is the devil thats known, and with SP3 it actually has most (but not all) of the security features of Vista. it's slower though. Installing raw XP on a machine the other day, I was really impressed with its boot speed. After applying SP3 and further patches it went to its owner far more sluggish than before. Oh... 196M ram. Oh dear. Have you seen how honey flows outside in the winter? Thats what your machine will feel like. Sorry... Are you welded to Windows? There are a lot of free OSs (Linux's and the BSD variants) that would run far better in that kind of hardware environment. -- STeve Andre' Disease Control Warden Dept. of Political Science Michigan State University A day without Windows is like a day without a nuclear incident. _______________________________________________ Thinkpad mailing list [email protected] http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/thinkpad
