Difference between Windows XP and Windows 2000 Professsional.

What is the major Difference between Windows XP and Windows 2000 Professsional.
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Windows 2000 benefits

Windows 2000 has lower system requirements, and has a simpler interface (no "Styles" to mess with).
Windows 2000 is slightly less expensive, and has no product activation.
Windows 2000 has been out for a while, and most of the common problems and security holes have been uncovered and fixed.
Third-party software and hardware products that aren't yet XP-compatible may be compatible with Windows 2000; check the manufacturers of your devices and applications for XP support before you upgrade.
Windows XP benefits

Windows XP is somewhat faster than Windows 2000, assuming you have a fast processor and tons of memory (although it will run fine with a 300Mhz Pentium II and 128MB of RAM).
The new Windows XP interface is more cheerful and colorful than earlier versions, although the less-cartoony "Classic" interface can still be used if desired.
Windows XP has more bells and whistles, such as the Windows Movie Maker, built-in CD writer support, the Internet Connection Firewall, and Remote Desktop Connection.
Windows XP has better support for games and comes with more games than Windows 2000.
Windows XP is the latest OS - if you don't upgrade now, you'll probably end up migrating to XP eventually anyway, and we mere mortals can only take so many OS upgrades.
Manufacturers of existing hardware and software products are more likely to add Windows XP compatibility now than Windows 2000 compatibility.
ref: http://www.annoyances.org/exec/show/article10-001
Lee W, MVPTechnology and Business Process AdvisorCommented:
One is newer than the other.  It's that simple... they added a few things to XP, but it's like a minor upgrade - kinda like going from Windows 98 to Windows 98 SE.  
Let's see what papa B. Gates has to say about different operating systems brewed under Micro$off-t  roof :
            Windows XP Professional Comparison Guide:
            benchmark-1 ( I don't buy it , BTW) :
            benchmark-2  ( this one proved to be more realistic ):
       unbiased comparison:
I like the way sirbounty tried to summarise differencies/linkeness-similarities between two OS-es
but there's always something to add to his answer. Anyway, I don't want to do that this time.
Honestly I don't think anyone running Windows 2000 on their ( more likely than not ) obsolete hardware
should switch to Windows XP. All that eye-candy, built-in features ( e.g. CD burning, Movie Maker , files prefecthing etc.), added support for smart cards, firewalling , scalability, Device Driver Rollback and System Restore  and other services trigged at system startup  by default etc. cannot justify perfomance trade-off after switching from Win2K to WinXP.
NOTE:  I'M NOT Windows XP fan so do not take seriously my anti-WinXP bashing , but since
           I AM Win2K fan take all my Win2K pros&contras with all respect.
a- Having my hands on hundreds of clients computers running most up to date microsoft OS-es ( XP, 2000,ME) I found it much easier to troubleshoot Win2K and/or WinME/98 than WIn XP.
b- WinXP might be better performer than Win2K but in sterile benchmarking labs. Once exposed to real life Windows XP becomes sluggish, nonresponsive and totally jammed cr@p.
c- Only havily tweaked, stripped down ( feature-wise) and totally controlled XP is good XP.
d- Although aging OS Win2K proved to be more popular OS among IT people than XP ( have to be proved)

More to read-more to learn:

good luck

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
Mike KlineCommented:
The comparison charts that Nedvis posted are a great place to start.  

At this point I can't really recommend installing Windows 2000.  The two biggest reasons I see on a day to day basis.

1.  In a domain environment the tools available to me on an XP box are much better.  One that comes to mind is GPMC.   There are others and I can list those if you would like.

2.  From a novice/home user perspective the biggest thing is that XP (specifically with SP2) has really stepped up in terms of security.  The firewall is automatically on and that may be the biggest benefit in my mind for the novice user.  

... New questions will soon pop up

2000 vs. XP vs Vista :)

Wayne BarronAuthor, Web DeveloperCommented:
If you are wanting to upgrade from 2000 to a newer version.
I would strongly suggest that you wait until [Windows Vista] is out.
I have personally tested the Beta version soon after it's release, and am right
Pleased with it's features and feels.

XP, in my personal opinion only.
Is a joke, I do not like it for several reasons. But will not go into detail.

Some multimedia programs that are being developed now, will only run on XP and not 2000
Which I feel is bad-programming, and should not be.

But still, wait until "Windows Vista" is out, then test drive it.

Take Care
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Windows 2000

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.