Professional or home?

In ,
PCyr. johndoe532004AThotmailDOTcom typed:

Oh I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just letting the OP know
that
just because Home is the main choice for Home users, that
doesn't
mean there aren't features in Pro useful to a home user. :-)


Great! Then we're in complete agreement.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup


"Ken Blake" wrote in message
...
In ,
PCyr. johndoe532004AThotmailDOTcom typed:

I'm a home user, and I find being able to allow certain users
certain privileges (among other things,) is worth the extra
money.
And there are more than a few extra features:


If you find those extra features valuable, and they are worth
the
money to you, that's fine. I believe you and I certainly
wouldn't
want to try to convince you of anything to the contrary.

Nevertheless, you're the exception. The vast majority of home
users
have no use for those extra features, and buying Professional
instead of Home is simply a waste of money.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup



All my points can be confirmed at either
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/h.../choosing2.asp,
or
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...p_home_pro.asp

1- Remote Desktop
2- Joining a Domain
3- File Encryption
4- Advanced Security Settings: Only available to home users
when in
safe mode.
5- Internet Information Services (I.E. Web server)
6- Multilanguage User Interface*
7- Multiple Processors
8- Auto install, configure, repair, and removal of programs
9- Offline Files and Folders
10- Unattended Install
11- Sysprep Tool
12- Remote Install
13- Group Policy
14- Dynamic Disk support
15 -Roaming Profiles (yes, I know that is for a domain, but
the
point is still there)
16 -Local Security Policy

*(applies to OL/VL versions of Pro)



"Tracy" wrote in message
...
What features does WindowsXP Pro have that home doesn't?
I've been
running a
copy of Pro (version 5.1) since it was released, if I switch
to
Home will I
notice the difference? I'm running a 6 computer home network
and
although I
do more than the "average" home user, I'm not running a
buisiness.

Thanks!
Tracy

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 01:17:23 -0400, PCyr. wrote:

I'm a home user, and I find being able to allow certain users
certain privileges (among other things,) is worth the extra money. And
there are more than a few extra features:

You forgot full support of ASR. Compare the price of a disaster recovery
program to the price difference between XP Home and Pro. Granted ASR isn't
the best/easiest solution but I consider it another point in Pro's favor.

--
Sharon F
MS-MVP ~ Windows XP Shell/User

Nick Burns wrote:
Simply put: Home = less code = faster runtime.


What a complete load of ********.



--
My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
lose his marbles?

Yep.

--
Paul Cyr

-----

The Debate Continues... www.xvsxp.com

Protect Yourself and Others in 6 Simple Steps...
http://davechalkconnected.ipbhost.co...showtopic=1802
-----

"Ken Blake" wrote in message
...
In ,
PCyr. johndoe532004AThotmailDOTcom typed:

Oh I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just letting the OP know that
just because Home is the main choice for Home users, that doesn't
mean there aren't features in Pro useful to a home user. :-)


Great! Then we're in complete agreement.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup


"Ken Blake" wrote in message
...
In ,
PCyr. johndoe532004AThotmailDOTcom typed:

I'm a home user, and I find being able to allow certain users
certain privileges (among other things,) is worth the extra money.
And there are more than a few extra features:


If you find those extra features valuable, and they are worth the
money to you, that's fine. I believe you and I certainly wouldn't
want to try to convince you of anything to the contrary.

Nevertheless, you're the exception. The vast majority of home users
have no use for those extra features, and buying Professional
instead of Home is simply a waste of money.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup



All my points can be confirmed at either
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/h.../choosing2.asp, or
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...p_home_pro.asp

1- Remote Desktop
2- Joining a Domain
3- File Encryption
4- Advanced Security Settings: Only available to home users when in
safe mode.
5- Internet Information Services (I.E. Web server)
6- Multilanguage User Interface*
7- Multiple Processors
8- Auto install, configure, repair, and removal of programs
9- Offline Files and Folders
10- Unattended Install
11- Sysprep Tool
12- Remote Install
13- Group Policy
14- Dynamic Disk support
15 -Roaming Profiles (yes, I know that is for a domain, but the
point is still there)
16 -Local Security Policy

*(applies to OL/VL versions of Pro)



"Tracy" wrote in message
...
What features does WindowsXP Pro have that home doesn't? I've been
running a
copy of Pro (version 5.1) since it was released, if I switch to
Home will I
notice the difference? I'm running a 6 computer home network and
although I
do more than the "average" home user, I'm not running a buisiness.

Thanks!
Tracy

*smacks head*
Thanks for the FYI!

--
Paul Cyr

-----

The Debate Continues... www.xvsxp.com

Protect Yourself and Others in 6 Simple Steps...
http://davechalkconnected.ipbhost.co...showtopic=1802
-----

"Sharon F" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 01:17:23 -0400, PCyr. wrote:

I'm a home user, and I find being able to allow certain users
certain privileges (among other things,) is worth the extra money. And
there are more than a few extra features:

You forgot full support of ASR. Compare the price of a disaster recovery
program to the price difference between XP Home and Pro. Granted ASR isn't
the best/easiest solution but I consider it another point in Pro's favor.

--
Sharon F
MS-MVP ~ Windows XP Shell/User

Nonsense... Less code = Faster Runtime?!? And yes, I am in agreement with
Miss Tick. :-) Sarah.

--
Best of luck!

Michael D. Alligood
MCSA, MCP, CCNA, A+,
Network+, i-Net+, CIW A, CIW CI


"Miss Perspicacia Tick" wrote in message
...
Nick Burns wrote:
Simply put: Home = less code = faster runtime.


What a complete load of ********.



--
My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
lose his marbles?

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 07:46:01 -0500, "Nick Burns"
wrote:


Simply put: Home = less code = faster runtime.

Not.

SNIP


---Atreju---

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 08:57:31 -0700, "Ken Blake"
wrote:

In ,
PCyr. johndoe532004AThotmailDOTcom typed:

I'm a home user, and I find being able to allow certain users
certain privileges (among other things,) is worth the extra
money. And there are more than a few extra features:


If you find those extra features valuable, and they are worth the
money to you, that's fine. I believe you and I certainly wouldn't
want to try to convince you of anything to the contrary.

Nevertheless, you're the exception. The vast majority of home
users have no use for those extra features,

And you are personally acquainted with the "vast majority" of home
users? I happen to personally know about 100 home users who all demand
Pro.

and buying
Professional instead of Home is simply a waste of money.

Don't be so quick to be frugal on everyone else's behalf.




---Atreju---

Mike H wrote:
'Home' is not a crippled version of anything.. it includes all of the
elements necessary for the 'home' user.. surprizing, eh?

doesn't SP2 eliminate the differences? In other words, no, it is
not and never was all that was needed - e.g. for security! - RM

No.. SP2 does not eliminate the differences.. XP Pro continues to have more
networking and security tools available to it than the Home version
regardless of what service pack is installed.. SP2 upgrades the general
security of whatever is present in the operating system.. the average home
standalone does not need XP Pro installed unless the user wants or needs
file encryption and passwording.. for the most part, Mr/Mrs Homeuser have
enough problems understanding basic stuff..


"Rick Merrill" wrote in message
...
Mike H wrote:
'Home' is not a crippled version of anything.. it includes all of the
elements necessary for the 'home' user.. surprizing, eh?

doesn't SP2 eliminate the differences? In other words, no, it is
not and never was all that was needed - e.g. for security! - RM

If you want to use Visual Studio.Net to create web projects, you need XP
Professional, because XP Home doesn't come with IIS. That's the only reason
I have to get it.

Roy

"Tracy" wrote:

What features does WindowsXP Pro have that home doesn't? I've been running a
copy of Pro (version 5.1) since it was released, if I switch to Home will I
notice the difference? I'm running a 6 computer home network and although I
do more than the "average" home user, I'm not running a buisiness.

Thanks!
Tracy

If you are already using Pro, you cannot downgrade to Home without a
reinstall. If you insert a Home CD it will not let you install over Pro.
Since you are networking, I suggest that you stay with Pro. Pro is better
equipped for networking. Home is a subset of Pro.

Note: The 5.1 means something like this: Windows for Workgroups was a
Windows 3.x version. Windows 9x and NT were Windows 4.x versions. Windows
2000 was a Windows 5.0 version. WinXP (all flavors) are Windows 5.1
versions. Win 2003 is a Windows 5.2 version. Longhorn will probably be
Windows 6.x, but I'm guessing. So, as you can see, both Home and Pro would
be 5.1 (as well as Media Center and Tablet).
"Roy Weiss" Roy wrote in message
...
If you want to use Visual Studio.Net to create web projects, you need XP
Professional, because XP Home doesn't come with IIS. That's the only
reason
I have to get it.

Roy

"Tracy" wrote:

What features does WindowsXP Pro have that home doesn't? I've been
running a
copy of Pro (version 5.1) since it was released, if I switch to Home will
I
notice the difference? I'm running a 6 computer home network and although
I
do more than the "average" home user, I'm not running a buisiness.

Thanks!
Tracy