I replaced a P4 HT system with a Core 2 Quad last fall. I built the new system earlier than planned because I wanted XP instead of Vista.
My Vista experience has been either how to make it dual boot with XP, or trying to figure out how to achieve functions that were easily available in XP. I find it far worse than Windows ME.
So did you need 2000 Server because of a multi-processor rig? I'm just looking that getting a Xeon adds things like FBD/ECC RAM. The only non-standard cost in my setup is running RAID 1.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 03:41 pm (UTC)I replaced a P4 HT system with a Core 2 Quad last fall. I built the new system earlier than planned because I wanted XP instead of Vista.
My Vista experience has been either how to make it dual boot with XP, or trying to figure out how to achieve functions that were easily available in XP. I find it far worse than Windows ME.
So did you need 2000 Server because of a multi-processor rig? I'm just looking that getting a Xeon adds things like FBD/ECC RAM. The only non-standard cost in my setup is running RAID 1.