From: Peter Machule (pmachule_at_hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Jun 15 2002 - 14:41:57 EDT
HUH ?
Have you actually used this operating system ...ever ?
It is arguably the best MS operating system .
The p233 Cpu is not an issue .
Memory will be tight with only 96MB though .
Win 2k is faster than win98SE / ME in a 256MB box.
In a 128MB box you'll see some paging. But it will still be more stable
than either 98 or ME.
It has vastly better handling of the MS resource problem than those two.
But at 96 MB it would be very tight .
Try it ?
The minimum W2K boxes we run at work are 192 MB.
We do NOT run ME . There are no advantages ( for us ) over 98SE.
Peter Machule
TRIUMF Nuclear Research
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve C." <stevec50_at_yahoo.com>
To: <pioroman_at_gmx.net>
Cc: <thinkpad_at_cs.utk.edu>
Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: [560x] Running Win2k on it...
> Yeah, it will be a lot slower. Why would you want an
> ancient OS like that? I wouldn't install W2K on
> anything since it's over 2 years old now and was just
> a facelift for NT which is 7 or 8 years old.
> It has lots of problems like not much support for
> multimedia, can't be recovered if it crashes, etc.
> Use Windows ME and it should be a lot better. Your
> Win98 programs will still run, most drivers will work,
> etc.
>
> --- "pioroman_at_gmx.net" <pioroman_at_gmx.net> wrote:
> > I have an old laptop running win98 on a 560x with
> > 96Mb of ram... I believe
> > it's a P233Mhz... is anyone using Win2K on it ? I am
> > thinking of upgrading
> > to Win2K but I am afraid that it will be slower than
> > Win98... given the low
> > spec of the 560x..
> >
> > Has anybody else tried this ?
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:58:59 EST