| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
 XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sun, 21 March 2004 22:17
|
 |
Hey guys,
I'm not really a Windoze user so this may sound like a stupid question (especially from such a geek) but what are the differences between XP Home edition and XP Professional?
Got my hands on a new computer with XP Home installed and I'm wondering if I should wipe it and install XP Pro.
|
|
|
Location:
Canberra
Registered:
August 2003
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sun, 21 March 2004 22:35
|
|
|
If it is for a non computer person it doesn't really matter, but home kinda sucks if you want to tweak any settings...
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sun, 21 March 2004 22:36
|
|
|
if youve got a copy of xp pro i would just install that, from memory it has better networking options and some other stuff that home dosent have. if your going to have to pay to get pro though i wouldnt bother id just keep home on there. one of my compters runs home and one runs pro, and ive never really came across a difference thats worried me
|
|
|
Location:
Canberra
Registered:
August 2003
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sun, 21 March 2004 22:36
|
|
|
And home has a larger choice of paper clip type 'helpers' but as most people turn them straight off it doesn't really effect the price of fish in china...
|
|
|
Location:
Northwestern Sydney
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sun, 21 March 2004 22:41
|
|
|
XP Home Has some issues with being connected to a network, I have had issues with connetcting it with 2000 server edition and had problems with file corruption with Autocad drawing file (but only autocad files.)
|
|
|
Location:
c'town, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sun, 21 March 2004 23:13
|
|
in other words home is for l4m3 a$$ n00bz and pro is for 1337 hax0rz g33ks
home < poo
home < pro < poo
therefore M$ <= poo
HTH! 
|
|
|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
 Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sun, 21 March 2004 23:48
|
|
This computer will be the gateway for the LAN in my study, so that's about all the networking I'll need from it.
I have Pro, that's why I asked the question, but I'd rather not bother reinstalling if Home gives me all I need.
P.S.: Rob < M$ < poo 
|
|
|
Location:
Parramatta
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Mon, 22 March 2004 03:17
|
|
|
xp home will not connect via a domain only a workgroup thats its networking capabilities. if ur going to use it as a gateway home will be fine so long as ur on a workgroup
|
|
|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Mon, 22 March 2004 03:56
|
|
Yeah, no domains involved. 
That's good to know. Thanks dude!
You know, in the time for me to start this thread, read all the replies, and add replies of my own, I prolly could've installed XP Pro.... 
|
|
|
Location:
ballarat
Registered:
April 2003
|
|
|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Mon, 22 March 2004 04:06
|
|
|
Sweet! Yup, I don't need anything in XP Pro.
|
|
|
Location:
1st street on the right
Registered:
November 2002
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Mon, 22 March 2004 09:53
|
|
|
Get xp corporate ed. Runs w/out serials and feedback. Can be installed on 100's of machines w/out probs and I have a copy if you want.
|
|
|
Location:
Newcastle
Registered:
July 2003
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Tue, 23 March 2004 02:48
|
|
|
basically if your not doing networking (or at least more then a basic home network) then home is fine. its the same guts underneath the skin just with a few toys cut out.
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Tue, 23 March 2004 14:33
|
|
I believe XP Professional has just RAS access. Which can be downloaded and installed. And 13 or 17 less boot up reasons. E.g (Update vid card drivers) = reboot. Domains. And a whole heap of junk. Why bother with home anyway? Unless hard drive space is critical then go with professional. Its got alot better recovery options than home. Especially if u'r running with a basic network even. Same crap. Still most likely would be provided on a princo or some other cd 
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
August 2003
|
|
|
Location:
Canada
Registered:
January 2004
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
January 2004
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sat, 27 March 2004 00:48
|
|
XP home was built around the windows ME kernel, and for this reason is it is slower, more unreliable, and doesnt have as many options as pro.
go pro all the way, if uve got home, then ur prolly some 'know-nothing, pay-for-everything sucker'  lol
|
|
|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sat, 27 March 2004 05:37
|
|
| Arch wrote on Sat, 27 March 2004 11:48 |
XP home was built around the windows ME kernel
|
Err... No.
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
December 2003
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sat, 27 March 2004 11:20
|
|
|
All your base are belong to us.
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne
Registered:
August 2003
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sun, 28 March 2004 09:37
|
|
|
You are on the way to destruction.
|
|
|
Location:
Sunshine Coast
Registered:
February 2004
|
|
Re: XP Home vs XP Pro
|
Sun, 28 March 2004 22:24
|
|
| Arch wrote on Sat, 27 March 2004 10:48 |
XP home was built around the windows ME kernel, and for this reason is it is slower, more unreliable, and doesnt have as many options as pro.
go pro all the way, if uve got home, then ur prolly some 'know-nothing, pay-for-everything sucker' lol
|
wtf are you on dude? 
home is just a dumbed down version of pro. networking is simplified, few other bits and pieces, but same basic program.
corp uses a serial but doesnt need to be activated.
|
|
|
