Jump to content

Welcome to Geeks to Go - Register now for FREE

Geeks To Go is a helpful hub, where thousands of volunteer geeks quickly serve friendly answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts. Register now to gain access to all of our features, it's FREE and only takes one minute. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more.

Create Account How it Works
Photo

high-end OS on slow machines


  • Please log in to reply

#1
Dragon306

Dragon306

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts
some people have critizied my use of Windows versions on computers that cannot deal with it easily, such as 450mhz machines with 192mb. but i am not as insane as some. on eBay i found a IBM 300XL desktop PC running windows xp and get this- it has 233mhz and 96mb. this guy has windows xp pro sp2 installed on it.

why do people cram them onto systems significantly slow then i do??

233mhz 96mb?? come on!!

why does microsoft claim various versions of Windows will run (untweaked) on requirements so much lower then reality???

or perhaps something like this? http://www.winhistor.../xpmini_eng.htm

Edited by Dragon306, 25 August 2006 - 03:33 PM.

  • 0

Advertisements


#2
Dragon306

Dragon306

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts
some people have critizied my use of Windows versions on computers that cannot deal with it easily, such as 450mhz machines with 192mb. but i am not as insane as some. on eBay i found a IBM 300XL desktop PC running windows xp and get this- it has 233mhz and 96mb. this guy has windows xp pro sp2 installed on it.

why do people cram them onto systems significantly slow then i do??

233mhz 96mb?? come on!!

or perhaps something like this??

http://www.winhistor.../xpmini_eng.htm

LMAO, maybe that was the goal of the guy selling that 300XL.

why does microsoft claim various versions of Windows will run (untweaked) on requirements so much lower then reality???
  • 0

#3
SirKenin

SirKenin

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts

why do people cram them onto systems significantly slow then i do??

why does microsoft claim various versions of Windows will run (untweaked) on requirements so much lower then reality???


Because they can.
  • 0

#4
HPDV8315LOVER

HPDV8315LOVER

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 224 posts
In order to get all the features on XP, You must have at least 128MB of RAM.

you can barely get anything to work on that computer.

And lastly, Do not curse in acronyms. Thanks
  • 0

#5
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
With windows you match the OS to the hardware, the way its designed windows works at its full potential only on systems that were fairly common when it was designed or better, XP for example really needs 256Mb of ram and at least 500-600Mhz on the CPU thats what you would call reccomended minimum below that its not designed to run as well you lose features and the older windows OSs will perform much better no those systems. You can cram an OS onto hardware lower than it should be run on and itll work usually, but not very well and not as well as other operating systems designed for it.

Its like buying yourself a brand new range rover and putting a 1 litre 4 cycliner engine in it, itll go but not very well and itll not be very nice to drive, whereas if you put your nice refined 2.5 litre diesel in it goes very nice and is a pleasure to drive. Do you see what im saying.

Now you can get modern OSs that will run well on low end hardware linux especially is great for that modern features on old hardware but its not anywhere near as bulky as windows is and arguably isnt as advanced/featureful but its almost there and some things are better. It comes down to choosing the right tool for the job.
  • 0

#6
Dragon306

Dragon306

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts
why did my post get doubled?? i swear i only hit post it once.

did you guys check out that link? very funny.

why doesnt Microsoft post the actual requirements to run with any decency?
  • 0

#7
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
If they are too high people moan and groan we have seen that allready on vista, people have run it fine on lower than reccomended hardware but MS have given it higher because any lower and it doesnt work as well and leave enough for apps to use, so MS do actually post actual requirements but you can see why they sometimes get lowered as if they dont people kick up a fuss because people are stupid.
  • 0






Similar Topics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

As Featured On:

Microsoft Yahoo BBC MSN PC Magazine Washington Post HP