Re: Where to get cheap XP Home?

The message <46B32C0F.3CA0EB4F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
from johannes <johs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> contains these words:



Johnny B Good wrote:

The message <46AFA2D3.DAEC2507@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
from johannes <johs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> contains these words:

ric wrote:

On Jul 31, 9:55 am, "archierob" <archie...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
3) Is your pal's PC system hardware of adequate spec to run XP
Home?

4) Your pal should check that his/her , programs and peripherals
are all supported under XP - not likely to be an issue, but worth
checking.

------------------------------------
Good advice from previous poster. Do not assume that the comp
will run
XP. In many cases the BIOS are just too old to cope. Visiting the
manufacturers site should give some info.

I have changed from 98 to XP on a PIII laptop from 1999.

An even better upgrade option for a machine that was supplied with
win98 pre-loaded would be windows 2000 SP4. A minimum of 256MB of ram
would give better performance than a winXP SP2 crawling in 512MB of ram.
Plus, no WPA or WGA issues to contend with.

My laptop has 288MB RAM (32MB glued + 256MB). It runs XP fine.

Presumably, FSVO 'fine'. :-)

Just out of curiousity, would that be WinXP SP2 fully updated? There is
a world of difference between the original version of winXP (unpatched)
and the latest SP2 version, especially so in the case of the time
required to boot up.

When I first tested WinXP some 4 or 5 years back on an Athlon 900 setup
(256 or possibly 512 MB, I don't recall exactly), I was most impressed
by the speed at which it booted to the desktop [1] (about 3 sweeps of
the zylon style boot progress indicator :-).

Nowadays, the boot time on current desktop hardware (no laptop slowness
to cloud the issue) after clean installing winXP SP2 is somewhat more
protracted (something like 7 to 12 sweeps of the zylon indicator plus a
longer post zylon indicator time) and is more comparable to the
(uncheated) boot time for win2k SP4.

[1] That was the _only_ thing I found impressive about winXP (even
allowing for the more sophisticated cheat algorithm than that used by
win98 to support the lie that it could boot up faster than win95).

--
Regards, John.

Please remove the "ohggcyht" before replying.
The address has been munged to reject Spam-bots.

.