ok i have two computers that im debating to upgrade i do not own a windows XP but I am able to buy one (legally) just if i do not need to upgrade i dont feel like using up money xD, my two computer stats are the following.

CPU: P4 1.7 Ghz
RAM: 256MB
HDD: 20GB
VGA: Nvidia Vanta LT
CD: CD-Rom

CPU: p4 2.66 GHz
RAM: 1GB
HDD: 250GB
VGA: Geforce 5500 FX
CD: DVD-RW /CD-ROM

it seems that windows 2000 runs slow on these computer espeacially the stronger one i would like to upgrade for more speed and to actually sync songs to my iRiver (though the syncing is not a huge issue).

I wouldn't recommend upgrading from 2000. Upgrading to XP won't speed up your computer. Have you tried other methods? Defragging your drive for example? Cutting down on running processes? Reinstalling 2000?

Life is more painless for those who are brainless.

well i have defraged takes for ever and i have run every possible utility at my disposal it still runs slow, and startup is very slow i have trimmed my regestry and cut down on startup programs though shutdown is way too fast it litteraly less than 5 seconds for the computer to completly shutdown that i really like.

If 2000 is slow then Jennifer is right, XP certainly will not speed it up. One thing you said may be your issue. You said that you had run every possible utility, what does this mean. Have you installed utility programs like Norton? If so, uninstall them as they slow your PC down more than speed it up. How many process are running at startup? XP will run well on these systems if configured properly BUT, so should 2K Pro (2K Pro is actually faster on most things) so figuring out what is going on needs to be the first step.

Oldest machine here is a P3 500 w/320m RAM, cold boots to 2kPro logon in 71 seconds (32 running proccesses).

Newest P4 w/512m RAM, WAS XP now 2kPro, boots to logon in 28 seconds (28 running proccesses).

Had a similar problem (5 to 10 minute boots)as you with older machine. Uninstalled ALL unused programs and ran "Abexo" to clean the registry.

http://www.download.com/3000-2094-10434887.html

Version 1 is free and works quite well, 3.1 is NOT free.

Every time you boot, the system looks at the registry for "instructions", there are probably a lot of "dead-end" entries in there. (Removed 263 from the old machine here)

Additionally get into the Task Manager (Ctrl-Alt-Delete) and check your running processes (lower left hand corner) Over 30 is getting excessive and sucks power.

Yahoo, AIM, MSN Messanger and the like should never be allowed to autostart, get rid of those "extra toolbars" too.

Please, let us know how it goes!?!

_________________________
Embrace paranoia, they ARE out to get you!

Have you installed utility programs like Norton? If so, uninstall them as they slow your PC down more than speed it up.

I beg to differ. I've been using Norton System Works for years. Mainly for the utilities as I've long since stopped resubscribing to the anti virus. I use Norton Speeddisk to defrag as it run faster than the built in Windows version. I don't know about tools to "make your PC run faster". As far as I know, the System Works only has tools for repairing and defragging.

It's been my observation and experience that most of the problems people have with Norton tools are usually a PEBKAC.

How many applications/services you have loading at bootup can make a difference in the length of time it takes to boot. Far too many applications these days want to install things that run at bootup that aren't necessary. Take the index tool that comes with MS Office for example. Totally unnecessary and just one more thing to load at bootup. So I always kill it.

Since 2000 didn't ship with msconfig you will want to download Startup Control (just google that name) and install it. It's a lovely little freeware app that allows you to pick and choose what loads at bootup. Once intsalled, run it from the 'Startup' applet in Control Panel and kill off unnecessary stuff like RealPlayer etc.

Once you're finished, reboot and see if it doesn't improve the speed with which your PC boots.

As the other replies pointed out, 2000 will run a lot faster on older PC's than XP. For that matter, it'll run faster on newer ones as well since it doesn't have as much overhead and as many annoying bells and whistles as XP.

erm... CurtR:

"...most of the problems people have with Norton tools are usually a PEBKAC...."

PEBKAC - you've lost me in the woods... perhaps explain that bit (please)?

PEBKAC = problem exists between keyboard and chair

;)

CurtR:

lol... that's a new one per moi... many thanks...

trvlr

You are the exception these days as many of the utilities are redundant in that they tend to do the same thing that you can accomplish with the utilities included with Windows and in many if not most instances run on top of the windows processes and double up cpu cycle and memory usage. Everyone will have different experiences but, given that the user says that they have used every possible utility there may well be several different programs isntalled/running/doing the same thing and fighting each other for resources. Norton utilites in particular (if you do a auto/typical install and not custom which is what 90% of people do) adds what, 8-10 processes to the startup? I used to be one of the biggest Norton supporters out there but, I have to admit it now that since Symantec has had it, it has gone downhill. There is just no other way to look at it, it isnt what it used to be and has becomne more bloatware than anyhting else.

Well, I'm exceptional in many ways. :)

I don't load things that aren't useful. I rarely let anything run resident in memory. And, I only use Norton to defrag...it's still faster and better than the built in windows defragger.....and the utilities that check for problems.

I don't use tools that state they'll "improve the performance of my PC". I know how to make mine run optimally thank you very much.

I think that's a big problem for a lot of people who aren't as computer literate as I (and other people) are. They think these applications will help.....and I've yet to see one that actually does. Most just mess your PC up worse.

Of course I custom build my own PC's so I don't have any Compaq/IBM/Dell crap software running either. Those guys (and all brand name OEM's) tend to load piles of junk software you'll never use on the systems they sell.

As to Norton being bloated or any of that....I don't know, don't care. The tools are still some of the best on the market as far as defragging and finding problems go. In fact, the windows defrag utility was one made by Norton and sold to Windows for packaging with 95. They (windows) continued to use the same one right up to 2000. Their new one works a lot faster than that old one.....lol......but it still isn't as fast, or as good as the Norton based defragger.

The simple truth is, I'm still using an older version of System Works that I got when 2000 came out. When it no longer installs on my newest PC, I'll probably stop using them too as I'm not interested in spending more $ on it....I feel I've spent enough. Besides, I don't need it in linux and XP Pro is the last Windows OS I'm buying. Time to get smart and switch to linux. I'm running two PC's right now with different versions on them so I can decide which I like better, and one of my firewalls is an OpenBSD box. I'm tired of supporting Bill and company too. You never get what you pay for and I don't like people invading my privacy for the sake of making a few more dollars.