There are a lot of questions out there on WindowsXP, and not a lot of answers, yet. I've been following reports on the OS for months now, and when I got the chance to beta test it for my University, I jumped to take it.
First off, let me say this: I have been distinctly unhappy with the reports of WindowsXP product activation, .Net integration, Smart Tags, and other 'features' of this OS. If I walked into this review with a mindset, it was a negative one.
That said: I'm going to touch on some areas of the OS, and what my experience has been with them.
NOTHING to write home about here. You thought Win2K had a long installation time? Get ready to wait. XP weighs in with a whopping 85 minute install on my system. This is timed from install beginning to functional desktop.
The install, however, IS complete. The only drivers I had to install were drivers for my onboard sound card (C-MEDIA). Even my NIC drivers (which always before required a floppy) were included. DirectX 8 was automatically installed, as were NVIDIA official drivers 12.41.
GUI
The first thing you notice, starting up XP, is the new GUI. Its a VERY different look than earlier Windows versions--easily the most different since the 3.11 to '95 leap.
Of course the question is, do I like it. After several days of using it, my answer is, somewhat. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif I don't like the larger Start button, but the new icons, by and large, are cool, and the new taskbar is nice as well.
The Start menu itself has been largely dumbed-down, unfortunately--while its stripped-down base functionality will appeal to casual users, power users may want to opt for the 'Classic' Start menu.
That's another positive about WindowsXP--many of the GUI elements can be easily and painlessly reverted to 'Classic' mode, without even requiring a reboot.
All in all, I'm impressed by the new GUI--and those elements I don't like are easily replaced with their Classic counterparts.
Drivers
Absolute great marks for this one, especially being a Beta OS. Not only did WinXP identify all of my equipment correctly (with my onboard sound as a noted exception) the drivers it installed have, by and large, worked flawlessly.
The machine does hang a bit when doing large disk transfers, and the sound skips a bit when the processor gets loaded--both new problems--but given as this is an RC candidate, I'm inclined to be lenient.
Just tonight, for instance, I installed a Stealth II 460 (I am using it as an auxilary card). I have never, in three separate machines, managed to get this card driver-functional. I was about to throw it away as non-working.
To my suprise, XP identified it, installed proper drivers, and the card works perfectly--the first time ever. The driver install was fully automated--I didn't even have to hit 'Next'--and the OS did NOT require a reboot.
Stability
Once again, no complaints. The OS, in RC1, is FAR more stable than WindowsME. While she's crashed on me a few times, once again, I'm more lenient--this IS a beta product.
Performance
With the exception of the afore-mentioned issues with drivers (IDE transfers a bit slow, sound a bit skippy) I've had no performance degredation. The machine boots QUITE quickly (under 45 seconds) and I'm quite pleased with desktop and application performance. Gaming performance has been reasonably good--I expect that driver improvements and updates will fix the problems I see here.
The Bad.
Honestly, not much here. In terms of stability, performance, etc, WinXP is faster than 2K on boot-up, more stable than ME, and packs a great deal more functionality than 98.
HOWEVER
There is the issue of Product Activation.
I want to make it clear, I oppose Product Activation on moral and philosophical grounds, not technological ones.
Technically, Product Activation is easy. Switching out my video card tonight also had no effect on the OS.
Philosophically, I oppose the idea utterly, and for this reason alone will NOT recommend ANYONE use XP.
As I said, however, this is not a technological point--so I do not include it as a technological negative.
The BIG question: Is the XPerience Worth it?
ASSUMING the Product Activation point is moot with you, the buyer, then here is my recommendation:
Users of Windows 3.11, 95, 98, and ME who are casual users of Windows WILL benefit from an upgrade to XP (assuming your machine can run it well). It blends the power of 2K with the ease-of-use of standard Win9xx, and, in fact, is EASIER to use than any WinOS ever has been before.
The Win2K user or power user of one of the above OSses (mostly Win98 holdouts):
No. It's not worth it. Stick with Win2K, or upgrade to it. Reason?
Win2K has all the power of WindowsXP, is extremely powerful, stable, and effective. Furthermore, it'll be cheaper than XP, and does not carry the entanglement of Product Activation.
Basically, WindowsXP packs enough new features, ease-of-functionality, and power to be a Godsend for those stuck on Win95, or the buggy ME.
For the 2K user, however, its a pretty GUI update and a few new features--but probably not worth the hassle.
If there are specific things you'd like to knwo about the OS, post them here. I should have RC2 in a few days and will post more then.
socalgal
08-07-2001, 12:55 AM
Good review, Dputiger.
I'm not a fan of Product Activation either, and W2K will probably be my last MS OS (I'd better get cracking on Drake, eh? http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif )
I read this C|Net article Microsoft clips Windows XP Smart Tags (http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-6399150.html) awhile ago, and was wondering if you did come across them. If so, that would be interesting.
I'd much prefer to see this EFF attorney's opinion (http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/166676.html) gain legal momentum if Smart Tags are still present in XP, especially in it's final version release.
[This message has been edited by socalgal (edited 08-07-2001).]
CMonster
08-07-2001, 01:11 AM
http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif
Dputiger
08-07-2001, 06:16 AM
Socalgal,
I DID come across Smart Tags--but, as MS promised, they are deactivated. I didn't activate them, since I hated them to begin with as well.
Also, the Windows Media Player DID attempt, by default, to control my 'digital library'--but all of its options were shutoffable.
BL00EY!
08-07-2001, 06:33 AM
shutoffable?!?!?......lol,your killin' me,
though your review was short ,to the point and well done.
thanks for the info.
daveleau
08-07-2001, 07:19 AM
Great post Dputiger. Thanks! I am very interested to see that switching the video did not warrant an activation. Did you call for activation before installing all of your apps? I would be very interested to see more on tweaking the system to see what sends it into a fit, making you call MS for another number.
Dave
thehig
08-07-2001, 07:52 AM
Is there a clear line when activation would be required.
For example, change of video card does not but change of Ram does or change of processor?
Just curious what is the line that you must cross?
Anyone know?
Dputiger
08-07-2001, 08:26 AM
I did NOT call MS for an activation number. Here's how the process worked:
The machine asked me to input the CD-Key (standard on any OS install).
I put it in.
It then asked for permission to contact MS and Activate the software.
I clicked yes.
Done.
That was it.
Here's what I know about Product Activation.
Upon initial activation, a code is generated for your computer. This code is based on 10 items, some of which (I can't remember all of them) are:
Amount of RAM
Hard Drive Serial Number
Processor speed and type
Video card.
(those are the ones I distinctly remember).
You can change up to FOUR of these 10 before the system will require a reactivation. In addition, I have heard that Windows will 're-center' the new hardware after some time has passed.
Example: If I Activate with a GeForce2 Pro, then switch to a GeForce3, the switch is counted as one of my changes. HOWEVER, after a certain period of time, the machine will reset and activate the GeForce3 as the base setting. Switching BACk to the GF2 Pro, at that time, would count as a change.
jkittlesen
08-07-2001, 09:11 AM
I too have installed RC-1,I'm very pleased with it's performance.But that's also coming from an Me user.I have never tried 2000.Will purchase XP only because I have no 2000 experience. 95,98, and Me just crash to much for me.
socalgal
08-07-2001, 09:37 AM
Dputiger, have you seen on your XP a
sysparese.exe
file? (I think that's correct spelling..) It supposedly enumerates and records installed hardware and application data.
I'm wonder if that's what the PA checks. I think it's in either your i386 dir on hdd (or from same folder on CD) and is a hidden file..
HomeYield
08-07-2001, 10:27 AM
Nice review Dputiger. Like jkittlesen, I'm a ME user with no 2000 experience. I've heard some good and bad things about XP and so I'm weighing my options as to upgrading to XP. Your review helps but we'll just have to see the final release has. Thanks for the hard work. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif
t048
08-07-2001, 10:41 AM
I heard from a friend who works at Microsoft that XP is just 2k with a new GUI and media copyright protection. Did you notice anything to validate that comment?
struggles
08-07-2001, 11:14 AM
I did. Although I really like xp so far, to me it seems identical to w2k, with a different gui. My installation went flawlessly...no driver issues...no exclamations...etc. That was nice!
Still putting it through the mill.
BTW, I already am sick of the cutesy icons and reverted back to classic windows.
Dputiger
08-07-2001, 11:33 AM
I disagree with your friend, somewhat:
I find XP superior to 2K in the following areas:
1) Boot speed.
2) Driver installation (2K is good, XP so far, flawless).
3) Ease of access. XP takes the power of 2K, and makes it more user-friendly.
Now, for a lot of people, these features aren't going to matter and aren't recommended. That's why I don't recommend an upgrade to XP from 2K for the power user.
However, XP is more than just a GUI and media protection.
edwelly
08-07-2001, 02:56 PM
Dputiger: thank you for your review. It was very interesting. As far as I am concerned, I will not rush out to upgrade to XP. I honestly LOVE Win2000.
I am studying for my MCSE and it is a little discerning knowing that Microsoft is already pushing a new networking OS. I guess I expect too much from the company I am spending $10k to get certified with… http://www.sysopt.com/forum/frown.gif
---edwelly
ItsHuge
08-07-2001, 06:24 PM
Don't think of it that way, there is no XP server remember
struggles
08-07-2001, 06:57 PM
Dputiger, you are correct. The boot speed is much better, which I find to be a big plus! Nothing worse than waiting.
And the install was better too. Mine certainly didn't take 85 minutes though, more like 30-35.
Things I find annoying:
1. Asking you if you want to close your dial-up connection on shutdown...Duh!
2.Going thru 2 windows to connect (dial-up)
3.Location of programs within start menu
4. Constant warnings about formating floppys and what that does.... again..duh!
5. Searching for things that are now buried under 10 windows
Overall, I still like it! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif
vass0922
08-08-2001, 12:23 AM
I can't find anything in XP http://www.sysopt.com/forum/frown.gif lol
Even beyond the redo of the start menu anybody thats used windows for a long period of time will have to adjust to the new placement of nearly everything.
Many things can be found within the MMC, but some things you have to drill down 10 windows just to make a small checkbox. While "user friendly" I think its been "dumbed down" too much for an experienced windows user, and is very frustrating. Can you adjust to it, sure but regardless drilling down that many windows still takes too much time http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif
vass0922
08-08-2001, 12:57 AM
Oh and one other note...
Another reason XP is a minor upgrade...
Windows2000 = NT 5.0 right?
WindowsXP = NT 5.1 http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif
Seriously you can see it in the windows versions!
Its a minor update...
Really is boot speed something to be proud about? Myself I'd prefer a machine that takes 20 mins to boot up BUT RARELY has to be rebooted versus something like Win98 that sure does boot fast... EVERYTIME you have to do it!!
Oh and before you upgrade to XP MAKE sure you have a huge chunk of memory and a good processor cause its a bit of a pig...
I'd highly suggest you look at it for what you do, some people will love it. I myself will stick with Win2k.
Will we upgrade our users up to XP? Yes
You know why?
Because upgrading to Win2k right now would be a moot point only because MS will be dropping support for Win2k in 2003, and thats only a little over a year away, so why try to start rolling out 800 users on Win2k only to do it again a year later. ONLY reason.
[This message has been edited by vass0922 (edited 08-07-2001).]
MadMatt
08-08-2001, 06:01 AM
Don't think of it that way, there is no XP server remember
Um, no. M$ is repalacing the whole lineup. There will be XP Server, XP Advanced Server, and (later) XP Datacenter Server. There will even be 64 bit versions of all but the Home Edition. At work we have XP Advanced Server (beta) running on several test boxes right now. Vass0922 is right - Besides the GUI, there are not many earth shattering changes, especially in the server products.
[This message has been edited by MadMatt (edited 08-08-2001).]
edwelly
08-08-2001, 06:20 AM
Everybody says that it is basically Win2000 with a fancy GUI. So why would companies want to upgrade to this? It looks like it will cost more than Win2000 so why pay for a nice GUI or better yet, why upgrade for a nice GUI?
What would companies benefit from this?
---edwelly
t048
08-08-2001, 08:26 AM
edwelly:
I understand that XP will better support 32bit processors.
Dputiger
08-08-2001, 09:12 AM
Edwelly,
If you read my review, you'll notice I don't recommend XP for 2K users. For ME and Win98SE users, however, XP is MUCH more than just a GUI upgrade.
Also, I've noticed that XP has very poor HDD transfers in general on my machine. So that may be part of why my computer takes so long to transfer data.
BBA
08-08-2001, 10:27 AM
I waited until I got my W2K certification to start messing with XP...now that I have, I love it.
I think it has features that really make it worth an upgrade from W2K.
Builtin DVD and CDR support ( natively ) are way cool. I have reverted back to the classis desktop, and changed logon screens, but it's completely customizeable. More than W2K.
I did have a driver issue with my TBSC and w2k and beta XP drivers, so I ended up using a mixture of both drivers to cure it.
The first night I had installed it I setup it's built in terminal server...way cool too.
My installation was an upgrade from W2K Pro, so installation took 23 minutes.
Performance is consistant with w2k, RC5 blocks went from 4.03 MK/s to 3.99-4.00Mk/sec ( on my 728 MHz P3 sys ), so thats not a big change.
I like it.
BBA
08-08-2001, 10:28 AM
BTW: There was no SYSPARSE.LOG generated. I think that may only be related to either RC1 or maybe a settings import wizard for Win9x OS upgrades.
I have good points about it and bad. I like the multiple user feature. Although with computers geting so cheap and me upgrading I always have a spare computer. So that kinda makes that moot. I really don't like the start menu. I like how multiple apps are grouped in the task bar.
I've had RC1 installed since it came out and have only booted to it 3-4 times. I'm happy with win2k.
my $.02
MadMatt
08-08-2001, 03:31 PM
Yeah, multiple people signed on at once is very nice. Remote assistance may become the bane of Sysopters however. All of your non-tech friends, relatives, co-workers can just send you an e-mail or IM in MSN Messenger inviting you to remote in to their machine to help them. LOL - there goes all ou free time!
Here's a tidbit, XP will automatically detect and load the drivers for any printers that are shared on your network. The nice little features are starting to add up.
MadMatt
08-08-2001, 05:01 PM
Remote desktop is pretty cool. You can setup an XP machine so it can be controlled over the network or even the web, a la PC Anywhere or Windows Terminal Server. The service is accessed on the client end through an ActiveX control on a web page running on the target machine. That means the machine to be controlled must run IIS, something to consider with Code Red running around.
After installing IIS, you go to the remote tab of the System applet in control panel. <IMG SRC="http://home.pacbell.net/mkclark9/remote.JPG" border=0>
You must specify which users can access the machine remotely and those accounts must be password protected
<IMG SRC="http://home.pacbell.net/mkclark9/remoteuser.JPG" border=0>
Next, from any other system on the network, open the browser and go to 'http://{computer name}/tsweb/' <IMG SRC="http://home.pacbell.net/mkclark9/remoteweb.JPG" border=0>
Specify the computer name and hit 'connect'. You then get a regular windows login screen. Type in your username and password and you're in. Over a 100mbps LAN the lag is almost imperceptible - Really, it's very close to being on the machine locally! You even get sound and video across the connection. I haven't tried games yet, but I doubt QIII will work.
In full screen mode, the only real indicator that you're in a remote session is a small bar along the top of the screen
<IMG SRC="http://home.pacbell.net/mkclark9/desktop2.JPG" border=0>
[This message has been edited by MadMatt (edited 08-08-2001).]
Dewi
08-10-2001, 06:52 AM
A few things to mention:
The install, however, IS complete. The only drivers I had to install were drivers for my onboard sound card (C-MEDIA). Even my NIC drivers (which always before required a floppy) were included. DirectX 8 was automatically installed, as were NVIDIA official drivers 12.41.
Actually xp does not install 12.41 drivers... it installs a dumbed down version 12.40 which doesnt work with everything. You wont be able to play some games (Tribes 2 in partitular) with the default drivers. I imagine alot of other drivers are dumbed down, or will be once Xp is released (some of the drivers installed were way ahead of anything I already had.. guess Ill know for sure when Xp is released).
Is there a clear line when activation would be required.
For example, change of video card does not but change of Ram does or change of processor?
Just curious what is the line that you must cross?
Anyone know?
You are allowed to make 3 changes in the tracked hardware before having to re-activate. Theres 2 ways to activate. The easiest is automatically when you get online. Nothing to do but click a few buttons. The other way require you to use your activation code (which is generated by your cd key and hardware config), and it is by phone. The hardware tracked is video card, hard drive serial, network MAC, processor serial (which alot dont have.. so its easy to bypass this), is computer dockable (laptops), amount of ram (and its only got like 4 or 5 options, so you can add a little w/o it even noticing), and hmm 4 others that I cant remember at this time (too early in the morning).
And the install was better too. Mine certainly didn't take 85 minutes though, more like 30-35.
Id check your watch, or start timing it from the begining, and dont stop until your actually in a desktop. This os is freaking slow to install. Definately slower then 2k. It takes me less then 15 mins to install Windows ME, it takes about 45 to install Windows 2k (not on the same system tho.. a slower one), and it took over an hour for Xp. Ive done many installs of each os, some on many systems. The Xp install is very automated, so you cant cut much time out by being a fast typer. It had to take you at least 45-55 mins.
conjh13
08-10-2001, 09:02 AM
It seems most of you are really forgetting something. With XP, you're not actually buying the software. What you're buying is the privilidge to use the software on ONE system. Never mind if you have a system for gaming, and one for business. If that's your setup, guess what? You have to buy TWO copies. And when you have to reinstall? There goes one of your activations, now how many do you have left? How many times before you have to shell out more money to be allowed to use what you 'purchased'? And what happens if you just bought a new system with OS XP, and M$'s servers happen to be down, perhaps due to a CodeRed type virus?
This activation is all a scam to transfer more money from your pocket to Bill's. You really think it will stop piracy? Think again. Did you know the enterprise version does not require activation? Honest consumers, who normally would not consider using illegal software are already asking their buddy in the purchasing department for large companies "Hey, you got the version of Office XP that doesn't take that stupid activation, right? Can you burn me a copy?" - just to avoid the hassle of this activation.
M$ has really gone too far this time. Try to imagine what the result would be if a music publishing company would try to pull off a similar thing: "No, you can't play that CD in your entertainment system, it's registered for use only in your car."
Just let all that sink into your brain.
1Old Fart
08-10-2001, 03:18 PM
Has everyone that ordered RC-1 recieved theirs yet? [by mail]
I have not yet I can download RC-2 anytime!
Cable being hooked up tonight http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif.............
voogru
08-10-2001, 03:35 PM
i now just recieved my RC1 in the mail.. i ninstalled it.. no drivers for my modem will work http://www.sysopt.com/forum/frown.gif i like XP other than it doesnt like my DSL modem.. might call BS (BellSouth)
im stuck with Windows 98 till then http://www.sysopt.com/forum/frown.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/frown.gif
-voogru
conjh13
08-10-2001, 07:38 PM
If you really want the hardcore info on WinXP, check out this web page: http://yikesdoug.epinions.com/content_1413128324
WARNING: This could drastically open your eyes and completely change your opinion about WinXP.
DISCLAIMER: The author of this post assumes no responsibility for any effects this website may have on your mind or opinion.
SysOpt.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.