Re: [NTO] Processor speed and WinXP
I run XP (networked) on PII 350's with excellent performance.
The processor speed is less of a concern than the amount of RAM that you have.
XP wants a bare minimum of 128MB (it is very sluggish with only 64MB) and prefers 256MB or more if you open a lot of windows at the same time.
The NT Kernal (in XP) manages memory and resources totally different than the 95/98 Kernal does and unlike 98, the more RAM you give XP the more resources you have.
The features that are in the Pro version and not in the Home version are nice to have but if you aren't running a LAN you can probably get by without them.
You can compare the 2 before you buy at
At 11:07 AM 6/20/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>I need the opinions of this wonderfully diverse group.
>I am currently running Win98 but am thinking of upgrading to WinXP Home edition. (I can't afford Pro.)
>My question is "Will WinXP Home run satisfactorily on a 400 Mhz machine? I have plenty of memory and disc space, but I am leery of
>the processor speed.
>What are your comments?
- Hi Jim,
Your comments encourage me to try to put WinXP Pro on my older Win98 machine
(350MHz, 256Mb). I worry, though, about the differing file storage formats.
XP uses NTFS, and Win98 uses FAT32 -- isn't that right?
What happens if I try to load XP Pro on that older computer? Do the formats
get converted? Does XP tolerate the older format? Do I end up with old
format for older files and new format for any file created after loading XP?
What about the more than 300 applications currently installed on the old
machine. Will most of them run without modification? I don't mind getting
new drivers for the applications that need them, but I certainly wouldn't want
to do complete re-installations of all those programs.
I'm certain all this has been faced/solved already. I just haven't been
paying attention because I didn't think my old machine was a candidate for XP.
What's a good News Group or Yahoo Group (besides this great forum) for support
with this kind of operating system conversions.
Thanks for the info.
There is good news, and bad news (sorta :-))
What will happen when you load XP OVER 98 is that you will be a very happy camper for the most part.
Now let me address each issue separately with the following BASIC intro.
Just as ME is the final version of 95, XP is in essence the final version of NT and aside from the desktops sorta looking alike, there is a world of difference between 98 and XP. XP is a totally different animal, it is not an upgrade of 98.
The most significant difference to the user (as far as I am concerned) between 95 and NT is that where 95/98/ME allocate a certain amount of memory as resources for ALL of the windows you open to share, NT/2K/XP allocates that same amount of memory as resources for EACH window you open. The NT kernal also added a few more commands which made life a lot simpler for programming windows aps.
Basically, to make a long story short, XP is the finished/polished version of 2K with more drivers than you can shake a stick at and the addition in some instances (depending on the license) of having to do the validation scheme which is not the ogre that a lot of people thought it would be.
As to the different file storage formats, 98 will do FAT and FAT32 and XP will do those PLUS NTFS. 98 will not recognize a drive that has been formatted NTFS.
At installation XP will ask you if you want to convert from FAT32 to NTFS and you simply answer no thank you and XP will leave the drive as FAT32 and will work with it fine.
The only difference you will notice as a user between using FAT32 and NTFS with XP is that with NTFS it doesn't run SCANDISK everytime you turn around. With FAT32 it still runs SCANDISK at the drop of a hat.
I would recommend leaving it as FAT32 until the next time you FDISK, then I would go with NTFS as long as you won't be trying to access the drive with 98.
As to the 300 applications, most will work, a few more will work when you use XP's "Compatibility" mode (to emulate 98 and/or change the video display criteria), some just plain won't work and some that don't will be replaced by XP's generic applications.
Examples of those that might not work are the utilities that came with your video card, your sound card, and your modem. If you have old Digital Camera/Scanner/CD burner software it might/might not work right but the generic drivers and applications in XP will probably allow you to still use the older hardware. For example, I have an old off the wall el cheapo 2X CD burner in one of these old 350 computers that never did work well and wouldn't work with 2K at all yet works just fine using the XP CD Writer utility.
Programs like Word, Excell, Quicken, NoteTab etc. should work just fine.
If you are a gamer (with a 350??) you might have some old games that give you odd results.
Most of your registry settings will change but those aps that are registered now will still be registered after the installation as long as you load XP OVER 98.
XP does not search your drive and automatically register applications like 98 does. If 98 is there then XP will use parts of the 98 registry and will register most files that were registered in 98. You might have to reload a few special aps like AutoCad etc. (but not many) to get them registered, then you simply copy your good stuff over the new installation and you ar4e right back in business.
Unlike 2K which had very few drivers with it, XP comes with hundreds of drivers and will amaze you that it can find drivers for most all of your old hardware.
The most likely problem areas for it will be old non industry standard hardware like modems, digital cameras, and scanners, you may find 2K drivers for these on their websites, or you may find that the XP generic drivers and applications will work for you.
99% of Drivers labeled for use with 2K will work fine with XP. Just in the last year or so have they started adding XP to the driver label.
In general you will find that XP is smarter and more forgiving than 98 and if you are in doubt, just let XP do what it wants to do since it will probably do the right thing for you.
Installing XP is a whole new experience and requires being prepared with a few answers before you start however this is less of a problem when installing XP OVER 98 or 2K.
As to help forums, XP has the best help manager you will ever use (especially when online) and you can go to the following link for most answers.
I would also recommend subscribing to the Exploring Windows XP newsletter ( Tips and Tricks) which is an email every couple of weeks.
I won't dwell on this further as it is getting too long as it is.
If anyone would like more info on XP installation, settings or Tips and Tricks, just email me privately and I will be happy to help you get over the hump.
At 05:18 PM 6/21/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>Your comments encourage me to try to put WinXP Pro on my older Win98 machine
>(350MHz, 256Mb). I worry, though, about the differing file storage formats.
>XP uses NTFS, and Win98 uses FAT32 -- isn't that right?
>What happens if I try to load XP Pro on that older computer? Do the formats
>get converted? Does XP tolerate the older format? Do I end up with old
>format for older files and new format for any file created after loading XP?
>What about the more than 300 applications currently installed on the old
>machine. Will most of them run without modification? I don't mind getting
>new drivers for the applications that need them, but I certainly wouldn't want
>to do complete re-installations of all those programs.
>I'm certain all this has been faced/solved already. I just haven't been
>paying attention because I didn't think my old machine was a candidate for XP.
>What's a good News Group or Yahoo Group (besides this great forum) for support
>with this kind of operating system conversions.