• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Need answer for this hard question

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Macadonious

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2004
Location
Georgia
Question: What reason did Microsoft have to offer Windows XP so soon after the release of Windows 2000 Pro.?

If you have a referance where you recieved your answer from, please plug it in. I need to know this as soon as possible.
Thanks guys
 
I cannot beleive that on this particular forum, that know one knows this answer or knows where to find this answer. Shame on yous
 
Weren't the OS's aimed at different markets? So 2000 Pro was for Servers, XP was for desktops?
 
they let people buy 2000 Pro, the people that buy it just want to stay upto date. Then they release XP, some of the same people that got 2000 Pro will want to stay upto date, so they buy XP, giving microsoft even more money.
 
dyefade said:
Weren't the OS's aimed at different markets? So 2000 Pro was for Servers, XP was for desktops?

that was it as far as i know. 2k pro was designed not for servers really (2k server, on the other hand...), but it was aimed at the business market. Home users were supposed to be using windows ME at this time. XP was designed and marketed for home use. Although i guess you could say that XP pro and 2K pro were aimed at the same markets... so the money thing could be a factor.

EDIT: on second thought... were they really that close? Wasnt XP released in 2k2... 2 or 3 years between releases has been pretty standard over the years. 95, 98, ME / 2k (both in 2k i believe) XP (in 2k2), and now in 2k4 or 2k5 we will have longhorn (or whatever its gona be called)
 
All of these are GREAT answers but, I need some info as to where to find this info. I have to do a 5 page report and this is just one part of it. I cannot find a way to look on Google.com to find this kind of info.
 
Do you want the conspiracy answer?

My thoght is that Microsoft could not come out with a stable os for consumer because it needed to make reasons to upgrade. However, they were going to get jacked on the server market without one. Vioala, win 2k.
Although win 2k was in every way superior to 98/Me they repeatedly said 2k was only for buisness use. Reason: they wanted people to buy 98--->me---> xp instead of 98--->2k

Same reason why win NT was never marketed at the home user.
 
I would love to put that in my report, but I need a referance to sick on my paper where I got the information :)
 
The link by dark_15 has what seems to be pertinent info to me-

Win2K released in four versions oriented mainly towards servers and business use.
(WinME was concurrently the home user suggestion from MS, but not highly popular.)

WinXP was/is oriented towards the home user primarily, although one variant is aimed at corporate use.

You have to scroll down the page, but I think that info is pertinent to your topic.

I also think it is correct. ;)

I can publish my own personal opinion on the topic on my website to give you a reference, but I am not sure if my combined conspiracy/lousy business ethics theory is either true or usable for you. ;)
 
rogerdugans said:
The link by dark_15 has what seems to be pertinent info to me-

Win2K released in four versions oriented mainly towards servers and business use.
(WinME was concurrently the home user suggestion from MS, but not highly popular.)

WinXP was/is oriented towards the home user primarily, although one variant is aimed at corporate use.

You have to scroll down the page, but I think that info is pertinent to your topic.

I also think it is correct. ;)

I can publish my own personal opinion on the topic on my website to give you a reference, but I am not sure if my combined conspiracy/lousy business ethics theory is either true or usable for you. ;)

Publish it anyways. I think that I will have to look at dark_15's link again. Maybe I can gather enough info to make a page or two. Thanks
 
Getting ready to quit for the night and I saw that you had posted again...

I decided to do a quick search to check some facts, and found THIS PAGE to start with.

Yes, it comes from MS and is part of the history linked to above by jajmon.

Basically it comes down to this: Win2K was intended for business users as an upgrade from Windows NT 4.0.

Windows XP was intended as an upgrade from Win9x primarily but built from the code in Win2K; basically, XP added the multimedia features from WinME to the solid core of Windows 2000, creating a stable, versatile operating system suitable for home OR office use.

At least that's what Microsoft says. ;)

I am sorry to say that I got a bit sidetracked this evening: if you still need a slightly wacko page to reference as well, I can do it tomorrow. ;)
 
nealric said:
My thoght is that Microsoft could not come out with a stable os for consumer because it needed to make reasons to upgrade. However, they were going to get jacked on the server market without one. Vioala, win 2k.
Although win 2k was in every way superior to 98/Me they repeatedly said 2k was only for buisness use. Reason: they wanted people to buy 98--->me---> xp instead of 98--->2k

Same reason why win NT was never marketed at the home user.

That makes total sense, and is hardly something MS have tried hard to disguise. I'm sure Macadonious (or someone else...) could find a business analysis stating this somewhere, then that could be a new angle in your report.
 
rogerdugans Thank you for the link. I beleive this will work.
dyefade I agree, this would be a great angle for the report. I just need to link the topic to someone.....nealric :attn:
 
Windows 2000 is definately meant to be used as a network operating system. The client version (2000 Pro) is specifically designed to access Windows 2000 Server(s), fully utilizing its capabilities through Active Directory. It's a pretty cut and dry OS. It's very stable and offers many improvements, such as plug and play hwardware support, over its predecessor - Windows NT 4.0. XP is based on Windows 2000 but has a more "user friendly" interface. (according to M$) It's meant for end users. It gives them an "easy to use" OS with the stability of Windows 2000 and even more hardware support.

So as to the question of why they released XP so soon after 2000 - why not? They're targeting different customers.
 
Back