Resources for XP?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Hi -

My machine has a Pentium III 666mhz with 133mhz FSB and 256k ram. I'm
running win98 at present but am thinking of upgrading to XP Pro to make
it fully compatible with a networked laptop.

In theory I have more than the minimum resources that MS claim to be
needed for XP Pro, but that often doesn't mean much. It's not a fast
machine, even with win98. I have about 30gig of disk space on reasonably
fast disks.

Does anyone run XP Pro on similar resources? What's the speed like?

TIA

Tony

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Tony Stanford" <tonystanford@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:yEeOtuAUkMBDFw41@BTOpenworld.com
> Hi -
>
> My machine has a Pentium III 666mhz with 133mhz FSB and 256k ram. I'm
> running win98 at present but am thinking of upgrading to XP Pro to
> make it fully compatible with a networked laptop.
>
> In theory I have more than the minimum resources that MS claim to be
> needed for XP Pro, but that often doesn't mean much. It's not a fast
> machine, even with win98. I have about 30gig of disk space on
> reasonably fast disks.
>
> Does anyone run XP Pro on similar resources? What's the speed like?
>
> TIA
>
> Tony

WinXP will work on that machine, but it will probably be slower than Win98.
If your motherboard will allow you to upgrade to 512 MB then WinXP might
even be a bit faster than Win98. The caution is that if the added 6 MB
doesn't exactly match what is there, WinXP might not see it.

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/OE
Please respond in Newsgroup. Do not send email
http://www.fjsmjs.com
Protect your PC
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Your config will allow XP to run. Jut that thee FSB may be the slow down
and the 256K RAM may be tight. You will just have to turn off a lot of the
XP visual effects.


"Tony Stanford" <tonystanford@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:yEeOtuAUkMBDFw41@BTOpenworld.com...
>
> Hi -
>
> My machine has a Pentium III 666mhz with 133mhz FSB and 256k ram. I'm
> running win98 at present but am thinking of upgrading to XP Pro to make it
> fully compatible with a networked laptop.
>
> In theory I have more than the minimum resources that MS claim to be
> needed for XP Pro, but that often doesn't mean much. It's not a fast
> machine, even with win98. I have about 30gig of disk space on reasonably
> fast disks.
>
> Does anyone run XP Pro on similar resources? What's the speed like?
>
> TIA
>
> Tony

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I have an older HP computer with a 500 MHz PIII CPU
and 512 RAM and Windows XP runs and performs just fine.
I would suggest adding another 256 RAM to your system
for best performance.

How to prepare to upgrade Windows 98 or Windows ME to Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;316639

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
Microsoft Newsgroups

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Tony Stanford" wrote:

| Hi -
|
| My machine has a Pentium III 666mhz with 133mhz FSB and 256k ram. I'm
| running win98 at present but am thinking of upgrading to XP Pro to make
| it fully compatible with a networked laptop.
|
| In theory I have more than the minimum resources that MS claim to be
| needed for XP Pro, but that often doesn't mean much. It's not a fast
| machine, even with win98. I have about 30gig of disk space on reasonably
| fast disks.
|
| Does anyone run XP Pro on similar resources? What's the speed like?
|
| TIA
|
| Tony

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005,13:52:02, Yves Leclerc wrote

>Your config will allow XP to run. Jut that thee FSB may be the slow down
>and the 256K RAM may be tight. You will just have to turn off a lot of the
>XP visual effects.

Sorry, slip of the fingers: 256MB ram! DUH!

Tony

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005,18:22:25, Tony Stanford wrote

>>You will just have to turn off a lot of the
>>XP visual effects.

What visual effects are you referring to? Games?

Tony

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Thanks. It's an elderly machine, and it's not worth spending the money
on. I have a stable system with win98, so I guess I'll stick with it. I
thought that 256MB wouldn't be enough.

Thanks for all the info.

Tony

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005,14:24:08, Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/OE wrote

>"Tony Stanford" <tonystanford@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:yEeOtuAUkMBDFw41@BTOpenworld.com
>> Hi -
>>
>> My machine has a Pentium III 666mhz with 133mhz FSB and 256k ram. I'm
>> running win98 at present but am thinking of upgrading to XP Pro to
>> make it fully compatible with a networked laptop.
>>
>> In theory I have more than the minimum resources that MS claim to be
>> needed for XP Pro, but that often doesn't mean much. It's not a fast
>> machine, even with win98. I have about 30gig of disk space on
>> reasonably fast disks.
>>
>> Does anyone run XP Pro on similar resources? What's the speed like?
>>
>> TIA
>>
>> Tony
>
>WinXP will work on that machine, but it will probably be slower than Win98.
>If your motherboard will allow you to upgrade to 512 MB then WinXP might
>even be a bit faster than Win98. The caution is that if the added 6 MB
>doesn't exactly match what is there, WinXP might not see it.
>

 

[moimeme]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

no : shadows, fading of menu items, transparency ... etc : none usefull just
"fun" or optical gadgets ( I have RAM but have turned all these off)

"Tony Stanford" <tonystanford@hotmail.co.uk> a écrit dans le message de
news: zVGepcC1JNBDFwJu@BTOpenworld.com...
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005,18:22:25, Tony Stanford wrote
>
>>>You will just have to turn off a lot of the
>>>XP visual effects.
>
> What visual effects are you referring to? Games?
>
> Tony