NewBJedi Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 I have XP Pro - I bought it OEM for about $130.00. I've changed the audio card and network cards a couple times. Now I'm adding a new MB, CPU, and RAM. Will it freak on me and force me to call MS or will it be okay with everything? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NerfYoda Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 My experience with it is its quite stable & modern hardware friendly. Since you seem to favor uber-recent hardware you shouldn't have any big problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicket the Ewok Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 Only XP Home has the product activation feature AFAIK. Even then it only makes you phone Microsft if you change 6 items within 3 months. Even if it does "freak" on you, you've got 30 days to phone a toll-free number to reactivate it. It isn't a huge hassle unless you either a) haven't got a touch tone phone or b) have a pirated copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaotic~Angel Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 Make sure anything dear to you saved on your computer is on a disc. My friend switched and it wiped his harddrive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acdcfanbill Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 yea, i would be mad if i had to call when i switched stuff, man, i switch stuff a lot! im always moven in new stuff, switching this and that... im glad i have, uhh, a well, nm what i have... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vader10 Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 Don't expect to just install your new mobo and cpu with your old hard drive with xp on it without reconfiguring or reinstalling the OS. Getting it to work without doing so is very very rare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrEEpaGe Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 uhhhh im pretty sure that you have to do the WPA regardless of home or pro versions...why would they NOT do that on the more expensive product? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tempest8008 Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 Because Pro is more corporate aimed. If I had to call in 300 or 400 copies of XP because we had to switch our NICs due to a lease expiry I'd be plenty pissed. Too much risk of down time. Just as a suggestion to NewBJedi, backup all the data you can't afford to lose, then resintall the OS with the new hardware and just reinstall your software app by app. You'll get a cleaner install that way, and not end up with a load of unneeded drivers, DLLs, and other flotsam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elijah Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 When installing XP.... its always best to do a clean install rather then Upgrade it from another OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBJedi Posted May 16, 2002 Author Share Posted May 16, 2002 Originally posted by Vader10 Don't expect to just install your new mobo and cpu with your old hard drive with xp on it without reconfiguring or reinstalling the OS. Getting it to work without doing so is very very rare. True. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBJedi Posted May 16, 2002 Author Share Posted May 16, 2002 Originally posted by ZDawg When installing XP.... its always best to do a clean install rather then Upgrade it from another OS. I'm not upgrading XP Pro. I'm just switching hardware. It'll be interesting if it goes smoothly - all it needs to do is replace motherboard drivers. That'd be a big change from 98. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaseP Posted May 16, 2002 Share Posted May 16, 2002 Windoze XPee sucks. Lets forget for a second that it adds nothing revolutionary to the OS,... or that it changes how everything is done, or that the minimum system requirements are much higher, or that it has security holes big enough to drive a semi through. Let's also forget that it represents one step closer to the ASP model of software distribution, making you pay rent for your software else your system shuts down (they contemplated that for the thing, you know, then backed off after analyzing ). The product activation thing is enough to cause it to be a p.o.s. The bottom line is that if you like to tinker with hardware or re-configure your system, then it is not the OS of choice. You'd be much happier with Win 2000, or even Linux using WineX to run your Windoze games. With Linux, you'd have paid about 5 times less for your OS or perhaps even less. You can even download Linux for free, and/or make your own distributions. Linux will never fail to function because of lack of registering, since it's OpenSource. It's a little harder to configure, but is capable of doing everything Windoze is, including net surfing, word processing, music editing, 3D gaming, etc. You can even run an increasing number of Windoze software with it. By the way, only with an Enterprise edition of XPee does the product activation get turned off,... for that you need a multiple license code. Single copies of XPee Pro still have the product activation feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBJedi Posted May 16, 2002 Author Share Posted May 16, 2002 Originally posted by JaseP Windoze XPee sucks. Lets forget for a second that it adds nothing revolutionary to the OS,... or that it changes how everything is done, or that the minimum system requirements are much higher, or that it has security holes big enough to drive a semi through. Let's also forget that it represents one step closer to the ASP model of software distribution, making you pay rent for your software else your system shuts down (they contemplated that for the thing, you know, then backed off after analyzing ). The product activation thing is enough to cause it to be a p.o.s. The bottom line is that if you like to tinker with hardware or re-configure your system, then it is not the OS of choice. You'd be much happier with Win 2000, or even Linux using WineX to run your Windoze games. With Linux, you'd have paid about 5 times less for your OS or perhaps even less. You can even download Linux for free, and/or make your own distributions. Linux will never fail to function because of lack of registering, since it's OpenSource. It's a little harder to configure, but is capable of doing everything Windoze is, including net surfing, word processing, music editing, 3D gaming, etc. You can even run an increasing number of Windoze software with it. By the way, only with an Enterprise edition of XPee does the product activation get turned off,... for that you need a multiple license code. Single copies of XPee Pro still have the product activation feature. I've had very good experiences with XP Pro. I have about 2/3 hours of free time to play with my computer. As for Linux: The only problem is that most people don't have the time .. that's pretty much it.. Linux - from what I've read .. takes a great deal of time to learn. The learning curve is way too high for most people - they'd rather click an icon and go at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicket the Ewok Posted May 17, 2002 Share Posted May 17, 2002 I use RedHat at work and although it is excellent for the kind of thing I'm doing (software development and research). It's powerful, it's got low overheads and it's very flexible. Which is great, when I've got tech support around, I'm on a medium-sized network and I need a lot of computing power. I certainly would not use it at home. At home I use Windows XP Professional. Is it really that much bother to phone up someone every now and again? It's certainly a lot less hassle than, say, installing a new IDE CD-RW drive on your existing RedHat install. While Linux can do many of the things Windows can do it is very rare for it to do them better than XP. Sure there's a Word-clone for it but it's no where near as usable as the real Word. For the desktop I still see no reason to use Linux, if you've got enough RAM to run XP. All your hardware is garenteed to work with it, it's easy to use and you know that every new game worth playing will work with it. Using Linux at home isn't l33t, it's dumb, IMO. If you're using Windows 98 then it's worth upgrading to XP just for the NT kernal and NT file system. If you're using Windows 2000 then it's probably not worth upgrading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaseP Posted May 17, 2002 Share Posted May 17, 2002 When Darth Gates uses his dark side mind trick on you and you end up paying yearly rates of $100/ year to use Windoze, don't tell me I didn't warn you... As for Linux's learning curve, my Wife who is fairly computer illiterate was using it the other day to surf the web,... My own learning curve was short. What is difficult is when you have graphics related problems. Linux has all the pretty icons and the plug and play adaptability. Within 3 years, I'll wager that 1/3 of the people who use Windoze now will be using Linux, at least part time in a duel boot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCanr2d2 Posted May 17, 2002 Share Posted May 17, 2002 The current figures show that Linux has more security holes than Win2000/XP... There are two versions of XP Pro. XP Pro for the home user, and XP Pro Corporate - XP Pro Corporate - The one that is the Warez version floating around, has no need for product activation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaseP Posted May 17, 2002 Share Posted May 17, 2002 Originally posted by BCanr2d2 The current figures show that Linux has more security holes than Win2000/XP... There are two versions of XP Pro. XP Pro for the home user, and XP Pro Corporate - XP Pro Corporate - The one that is the Warez version floating around, has no need for product activation... Who's figures??? Microshafts??? The only security holes in Linux are usually a result of using some sort of server software (usually out of date) on the system, such as Apache. The OS itself with a firewall working is secure. The bigest danger is someone hacking your system to use as a proxy for an attack on other machine. The nature of Linux makes it unlikely to fall victim to the types of attacks that cripple Windoze machines. For example, in Linux there is no program code which automatically runs such as ActiveX. Most Linux e-mail programs are non HTML loading by default (something that isn't easily turned off in Outlook Express). Viruses and Worms are virtually unknown in Linux, as they can't be as destructive. The architecture of Linux means that the worm or virus would have to independantly crack the root password and know what to do with it once it has. An attack on a Linux machine usually means that the attacker is actively trying to hack root and not using some sort of wind-up-and-go program to do it like in Windoze. Attacks like buffer overflow attacks are usually targeted attacks and are used against Linux based servers which are not well firewalled. The difference is that most Linux hacks are discovered when there is relatively little damage done, sometimes before hackers have exploited them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCanr2d2 Posted May 17, 2002 Share Posted May 17, 2002 Ever stop to think that because Windows is so wide spread, and has such a hated name among those that are in the hacking crows, why would they bother with Linux? Actually I should correct myself, I have reread the article - It was in reference to Windows NT/2000 servers Vs Unix/Linux servers and the amount of security holes in each. Do not paint MS as the evil empire, as many of you are hipocrits, who will bag MS, and will use Windows and Office without even thinking about it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.