On 12 Aug, 01:26, "S.Lewis" wrote:
"Barry Watzman" wrote in message

...

"2000 is still more reliable than XP, of course"

I would take issue with that. So would lots of other people. XP is the
best OS MS has ever released.

snip

I completely agree.

I have had 3 of these Flaptops now, and on every one XP occasionally
blue screens when opening word2003. W2000 does not. I also regularly
get pairs of dialogues complaining that certain memory addressses
could not be read. Windows explorer, or IE will trigger these. That
never happens in W2K. ctrl-alt-del to access the task manager works
every time in W2k. In XP it frequently has to be repeated. Changing
from DHCP to a manual IP address does not require a reboot in W2K. In
XP it often does. Some USB keys are not recognised in XP when plugged
in, but this works perfectly in W2K. The wifi signal strength is
displayed as either 2 bars (no signal) or 5 bars (some signal) in XP.
It works as expected in the older OS.

At home I find my XP machine has got slower as it downloads more and
more microsoft "fixes". My private W2K machine has never done that.