Dual Core vs. Dual Processor

Kilmako,

Thanks for your input.
The main issue as I saw it was the "dual" aspect - I don't need all the admin stuff on this pc - or rather the user doesn't.

I was interested to see if anyone would weigh in on the dual processor issue. From the research that I have done XP Home works just fine on Dual Core processors - I have even heard it claimed that it will also handle quad core processors.

The test seems to be (whether the cores are recognized and supported) it to see if two CPUs turn up in Task Manager. I have seen it reported that they do - however, it is also recognized that computers will not run significantly faster unless the software is designed to capitalize on the multi-core architecture. Most software isn't because of the fact that there is still a lot of single core machines around. If I were using sophisicated CAD and video processing software that was written to do so I would not be looking at saving $100 on such a machine!

I agree about the extra perks of XP Pro - I have used it for a few years now. I also agree about the Media editions and I would go one to state (IMO) that Vista Home Basic is also better than Vista Home Premium (because that Aero is just window dressing - sapping processor power - and the media extras are like the comparison between XP and XP Media editions)

As for XP Pro being more secure. I am not sure that I agree. Having fewer options for the user to set potentially makes home MORE secure - not that my user is likely to enable IIS or perform any admin tasks!

I also switch between machines that run XP Home and XP Pro and frankly I can't really report much of a difference when it comes down to what I can and I can't do wrt admin tasks. I also run a Linux box with and Apache web server and Samba shares for my Windows users - so I have performed a fair amount of configuration for sharing and security.

Martin