Most stable XP ? XP pro . Is there a difference

Imran Zaidi · July 21st, 2003, 04:00 PM

How about this, then, for semantics...

'It has long been a part of Microsoft's core marketing strategy to urge professional users to migrate towards their 'Professional' line of products.'

It's not about sabotage. It's about the amount of work they will actually dedicate to fixing and improving a particular product. One such example... Microsoft continues support for its NT based products for a LOT longer than it does for it's Home counterparts. That in itself is worth the price of admission.

This is just my opinion based on my experiences. Not trying to force anything on anyone. Thanks.

Nigel Moore · July 22nd, 2003, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Microsoft continues support for its NT based products for a LOT longer than it does for it's Home counterparts

Extended support is not offered for home products, but I guess that's based on the fact that consumers aren't interested in paying support costs. Professional/business users have a different mindset. Other than that, Microsoft supports 'legacy' home and professional OSes to the same extent, according to the MS website (policy). The oldest versions of Windows still to be supported are WinMe and W2K, which is in line with their policy of only supporting one older version than is current.

As for XP Home and XP Professional they are both based on the NT5.1 kernal, so the answer to Bryan's original question is that they are of equal stability, unless you have good documented evidence to the contrary. In which case, I'm sure that there would be many people interested in reading it.

Imran Zaidi · July 22nd, 2003, 06:48 AM

Yes, I already said I'm looking through my records for that info.

And after spending years as an IT administrator, support is much more FREQUENT for the professional version (ie packs, patches, etc.). That is a living real world fact, sir, I'm sorry.

I think I'm happy with this thread. Thanks and have a great day.

Will Fastie · July 22nd, 2003, 09:29 AM

There is one significant difference between XP Home Edition and XP Proffesional that may be of interest to users of video software, and that is the absence in XPhe of any user types except "limited" and administrator. XPpro allows all the user types available in Win2Kpro.

With respect to user privileges, there are three kinds of application programs: those that ignore the issue, those that require a particular minimum user level, and those that work properly no matter what the user level.

As it turns out, very few programs associated with video work no matter what the user level. They either require a particular user type or, because they ignore the issue, usually don't run properly except in an administrator or power user account (this is common in applications written with Win9x in mind and there are a lot of video programs like that).

The most common solution to this problem is to set up XPhe as Win9x would be set up, with a single user, no password, and administrative rights. That allows any program to run but also creates a potential security problem, as the system is wide open to outside interference unless well-protected by a firewall or other network controls.

Bottom line: running as a power user in Win2K or WinXPpro allows 99% of software to run properly while providing the best framework for security. WinXPhe doesn't offer the option.

Will

Nigel Moore · July 22nd, 2003, 10:07 AM

Your system is wide open to external abuse if you don't employ a firewall or other measures, no matter what your user rights.

Will Fastie · July 22nd, 2003, 10:41 AM

Without a static IP and at least one share, it takes more than just casual knowledge. A Win9x machine with no shares that dials up is very hard to catch.

A WinXPhe machine running with a limited user is not invulnerable, but it is much harder for things like malicious Web sites to muck about with the Registry or other protected parts of the system. That same system running an administrator is wide open, bare naked, and has some vulnerabilities even behind a single firewall. A dual firewall (outer, DMZ, inner) closes most of those holes, but most homes, home offices, and small businesses can't afford either the hardware or human resources to manage that level of complexity.

But in essence, I agree.

July 22nd, 2003, 09:29 AM	#19
Will Fastie Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Jarrettsville, MD Posts: 353	XP Home has no Power User There is one significant difference between XP Home Edition and XP Proffesional that may be of interest to users of video software, and that is the absence in XPhe of any user types except "limited" and administrator. XPpro allows all the user types available in Win2Kpro. With respect to user privileges, there are three kinds of application programs: those that ignore the issue, those that require a particular minimum user level, and those that work properly no matter what the user level. As it turns out, very few programs associated with video work no matter what the user level. They either require a particular user type or, because they ignore the issue, usually don't run properly except in an administrator or power user account (this is common in applications written with Win9x in mind and there are a lot of video programs like that). The most common solution to this problem is to set up XPhe as Win9x would be set up, with a single user, no password, and administrative rights. That allows any program to run but also creates a potential security problem, as the system is wide open to outside interference unless well-protected by a firewall or other network controls. Bottom line: running as a power user in Win2K or WinXPpro allows 99% of software to run properly while providing the best framework for security. WinXPhe doesn't offer the option. Will

July 21st, 2003, 04:00 PM	#16
Imran Zaidi Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,315	How about this, then, for semantics... 'It has long been a part of Microsoft's core marketing strategy to urge professional users to migrate towards their 'Professional' line of products.' It's not about sabotage. It's about the amount of work they will actually dedicate to fixing and improving a particular product. One such example... Microsoft continues support for its NT based products for a LOT longer than it does for it's Home counterparts. That in itself is worth the price of admission. This is just my opinion based on my experiences. Not trying to force anything on anyone. Thanks.

July 22nd, 2003, 06:48 AM	#18
Imran Zaidi Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,315	Yes, I already said I'm looking through my records for that info. And after spending years as an IT administrator, support is much more FREQUENT for the professional version (ie packs, patches, etc.). That is a living real world fact, sir, I'm sorry. I think I'm happy with this thread. Thanks and have a great day.

July 22nd, 2003, 10:07 AM	#20
Nigel Moore Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Switzerland Posts: 358	Your system is wide open to external abuse if you don't employ a firewall or other measures, no matter what your user rights.

July 22nd, 2003, 10:41 AM	#21
Will Fastie Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Jarrettsville, MD Posts: 353	Without a static IP and at least one share, it takes more than just casual knowledge. A Win9x machine with no shares that dials up is very hard to catch. A WinXPhe machine running with a limited user is not invulnerable, but it is much harder for things like malicious Web sites to muck about with the Registry or other protected parts of the system. That same system running an administrator is wide open, bare naked, and has some vulnerabilities even behind a single firewall. A dual firewall (outer, DMZ, inner) closes most of those holes, but most homes, home offices, and small businesses can't afford either the hardware or human resources to manage that level of complexity. But in essence, I agree.