Microsoft Windows XP Professional/Home
Nov 02 '01 (Updated Nov 08 '01)
The Bottom Line If you're on 98, any XP move will be more stable. If you're on 2000, stick with it a little longer unless you need the new GUI.
What is XP?
XP stands for eXPert (or so I've been told). Although, I think it stands for laX Privacy. It is the latest in the Windows operating systems from Microsoft. I will review both Home and Professional versions here.
Since there hasn't ever been a previous Home version based on this OS, I'll lump it into this review since Professional and Home are mostly the same (with a few key exceptions, of course).
Personal Information Collecting
This item is probably going to be harped on the most by those concerned over their privacy. However, one new thing that's been added to Windows XP is more information is collected and sent to Microsoft. In order to use XP for longer than 30 days, you will need to activate it. I haven't had the time to sniff the network to see what's actually being sent. Although, I understand that when you activate over the Internet, the activation program bundles up information about your system's configuration and sends it to Microsoft. Microsoft claims no personal information is sent. They then keep this in their database for who knows how long or for what reason.
If you can't activate over the Internet, you can call them on the phone and they will activate it then and there, probably requiring personal information. I'm not certain of all of the implications of activations, though. Depending on the information they are collecting about your hardware, they could prevent you in the future from reactivating if you reinstall again or substantially change your hardware configuration. Or, any number of other scenarios you can think of.
Installation of XP
Installing XP is mostly the same as any prior version of 2000. What isn't the same is the time it takes. Installing XP Home or Professional seems to take about twice to three times as long to install as did with 2000 Professional. XP Home takes just as long as XP Professional. However, you still have to navigate through the ASCII (terminal) based screen to answer a few questions (i.e., what partition you want to use, agree to terms, etc.. not necessarily in this order).
Installation Bootup
After it's done copying files, it boots into the GUI screen to finish the install. The first thing that you'll notice that's different when it boots up is the bootup screen. No longer is there that flickery white screen with a blue status bar. MS has now made it into a black screen with a video-gamey look. In fact, the whole new XP GUI looks and feels rather video-gamey (influences from the Xbox?)
After the boot screen is over (which takes about the same length of time that 2000 Professional does to boot), it goes through the motion of actually installing the OS onto
the computer. After a few wizard-ish windows (like 2000 Professional), it proceeds to install all of the components. Be prepared to go watch TV or do something else as the installation takes quite a while. After this lengthy install with rather uninformative messages about what it's really doing, it finally reboots into the OS for the first time. However, this is where Professional and Home vary.
Windows XP Home vs. Professional
XP Home is basically XP Professional that has been 'dumbed-down'. This means that it is basically Professional reconfigured to 'act' like Windows 98/ME. But, be warned, this is NOT Windows 98/ME nor will it be completely compatible with Windows 98/ME. Home, in other words, is based on the NT kernel. It acts and feels like Professional (i.e., NT). It does not act or feel like 98/ME (that's at least a good thing considering how often 98 crashes or how braindead ME is).
XP Home also cannot participate in Windows domains or domain security. This means that if you have a domain controller at your home, XP Home cannot be joined into the domain. However, it can connect to Windows shares. You'll just be required to 'log into' each share separately through the login panel. Home can be placed into the Workgroup named the same as your other computers and can participate in that way (just like 98).
XP Home has modified the users panel to give a different look and feel from the way XP Professional's users/groups function. Home doesn't have an 'Administrator' account as such. Instead, Home requests you for an initial account that will be the 'Administrator' named whatever you want. I suppose you could create an 'Administrator' account with administrator privileges to mimic XP Professional.
XP Home also has other issues. For example, when I tried to load an 16 bit Windows installer, both Explorer and the 'cmd' shell terminal told me that it cannot run 16 bit apps and refused to load this installer. However, I then ran 'command' (command.com) Windows shell which did run the 16 bit app. I figured that if it had 'command' that it had to be mostly compatible with commands under that. I was right. XP Professional, on the other hand, ran the 16 bit installer app without problems.
XP Home has other changed things. For example, looking at the Microsoft Management Console (MMC) under the local computer settings, the 'Users and Groups' category is conspicuously missing. However, there is a 'new' control panel that's been added for XP Home to control users. XP Home also doesn't support SMP computers. So, if you have a multi-CPU computer, you better get XP Professional.
I'm sure there are other subtle differences between XP Home and XP Professional, but these are the major differences. XP Professional, on the other hand, is nearly identical to 2000 Professional (with the exception of the GUI).
New GUI look and feel (themes)
The new XP GUI is part of the new 'themes' area. Two themes are loaded initially:
1) Windows XP Theme
2) Windows Classic theme (95/98/2000 look/feel).
The GUI looks and feels like a child with a crayon colored it. It feels somewhat like a video game and looks less professional and more home-userish. It appears to be trying to compete with a few of the themes that are included with Gnome under Linux.
The explorer interface changed to include bigger icons with a different layout. Like we all have 1600x2000 displays to show yet larger icons. Thankfully, you can go back to the
traditional views. MS also brilliantly added even larger side panels in each Window that I found no way to shrink (other than turning them off).
Sounds
There are new sounds everywhere. Some in places that are unexpected. Most of them are the airy-piano-with-a-touch-of-synth style.
What's new?
Well, to be honest. Nothing. Short of IE 6.0, which is available on 2000 and 98, and the new GUI theme, that's about the only new thing I saw right off the bat. The newest thing they did was 'dumb-down' Professional to make it like Windows 98, but still based on the NT kernel.
Should I upgrade?
Well, that's up to you. But, keep in mind that a new OS version opens a whole new can of worms with regards to the following:
1) Old unpatched security holes
2) New features that open new security holes
3) New service packs that supposedly fix the security holes
4) Even more security holes
So, for those of you running 98, you will gain a LOT of stability. Believe me, even 2000 is gobs more stable than 98/ME will ever be.
If you run lots of games on 98/ME, then you better make sure those games run under NT/2000. If they don't run under these platforms they are probably not likely to run under XP (any version).
Although, MS did add a 'compatibility mode' that supposedly helps out a bit. Since I'm not an avid gamer, I can't test this mode well enough to speak about it. I also didn't find this mode in XP Home immediately, but it doesn't mean it's not there.
Personal experiences
I found XP to be slow to install, about the same speed as 2000 to boot and no faster running apps. It also appeared to have a bigger memory footprint than 2000. So, if you have 128 megs, you might be rather squeezed for RAM. You should probably consider upgrading. However, even adding the RAM may not materially make XP faster. Of course, all the new GUI theme features are bound to add more overhead. Especially with the shaded window borders, larger multi-colored/shaded icons, etc.
Comparing the XP Gui to Apple's MacOS X Aqua, Aqua wins pretty much hands down. Aqua falls down in only one area, web integration into the Finder. While you can seamlessly switch from local drives to web sites in Windows' Explorer, you cannot do this in Aqua. Aqua wins in professional look and feel. I can easily see any business using Aqua in their office.
On the other hand, I can't say the same about Windows XP GUI theme. Thankfully, you can switch back to Classic Theme at any time.
Microsoft Silliness
In my installation, I created only one partition to load XP onto. When I got to the point to explore into C:\, a very large message pops up inside the explorer window saying
something similar to the following: "This is the volume where Windows XP is loaded. It is strongly recommended that you do not modify this volume to keep the system in running order". It's like I'm thinking, "Ok then, where the heck am I supposed to put my files?". Like I'm likely to follow that advice. Further, if they want someone to follow this advice, then MS should force you to create two partitions/volumes and leave C:\ unavailable for file use.
Next, when you go to browse for new themes, you end up at a Microsoft web site showing you the Windows XP Plus! package. A package that costs an additional $39.95 to purchase. What a complete and utter scam! Not only did you pay the $99 for Home or $199 for Professional to upgrade, now you'll have to outlay an additional $39.95 to buy this rather useless package just so you can get some additional themes. Themes that, in my opinion, should have been included with the OS (or at least available for free on the Net).
My personal advice
No matter what I say here, people are likely to load and use this product anyway. But, I don't recommend it as it doesn't have enough new features to justify its new size, new requirements and new price. For $99 or $199, they should have included a heck of a lot more than what's in XP. Unfortunately, MS has people over a barrel because they can drop support for 2000 at any time and force you to move to XP.
For those of you using 98/ME be very careful when upgrading. You may lose some (or a lot) of your older applications that do not run on XP. Hopefully the compatibility mode has been checked for completeness, but knowing Microsoft, their interest is in releasing the product and making money more than making sure it is compatible with prior applications.
Update 11/08/01: GUI Consistency
Microsoft didn't keep the GUI 100% consistent throughout the themes. For example, if you open a command window (by using start-run and type 'cmd'), the window opens with the 'Classic' look instead of the XP look.
Further, if you're in the 'Display Properties' window (by right clicking on the background and then click 'properties') and then click the Appearance tab, you'll notice a representation of the XP GUI in the 'example' area. If you click the Advanced button, the 'Advanced Appearance' window opens showing an example of the 'Classic GUI'. This one is very apparent when you have both example windows side by side.
There may be other inconsistencies as well. Granted, it's not a security hole, but it does show that Microsoft may have not finished the themes part 100% before releasing XP. Makes you wonder, what else isn't finished?
Good luck!
Recommendation: Not Recommended.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
skywalk
|
|
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Reviews written: 30
Trusted by: 9 members
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.