![]() Do you think they would do this if Linux did not exist? The fact that MS is starting to offer this is a testament to Linux. So anyways, I probably look like a massive XP fanboy, but trust me, I only know this from being curious and out of necessity Would even play her internet radio stations using an older version of winamp. My grandmothers PC crapped out (it was a 2.4p4/512mb pc2100…) and all I had on hand was that p75/128mb… After heavy tweaking, it ran opera 7.5, office 2k3, and various other programs perfectly fine. I suggest people here use FreshUI for changing more settings and you can strip out all the uneccesary cruft using XPLite…Īnd yes, XP can be very usuable on a slow system. Now, you can do a LOT more by exploring the registry. at the bottom of the advanced tab click on ‘error reporting’ and turn it off. Now under the performance window select the advanced tab and chance the processor scheduling and memory usuage both to “programs”. ![]() My Computer -> properties -> advanced -> performance settings -> put it on custom, select ‘drag full windows’ (do this if you don’t like windows outlining when you move them) and ‘drop shadows on icons’. Server service – if you want file sharing and what not. Plug and play - windows messes up sometiems if this is disabled RPC - kill it and LOTS of stuff gets messed up Wndows audio - have to have this if you want any audio With static IPs you don’t need this either. ![]() To get XP to run acceptably on a p75 does require a LOT of tweaking and patience I won’t claim it’ll run right out of box.ĭhcp client - if you set up a connection manual You can install XP on pretty much any speed cpu, it WILL throw up an error if you have to little ram or are trying a 486. I’ve never had the windows installer tell me XP can’t install on a system because of cpu speed. That may have been due in part to the unavoidable cruft that accumulates on systems that have been installed over 3 years ago, and have been running 40 hours a week since then… Most machines were PIIs (Pentium 2) at 400MHz, and of the lot, those that had been upgraded to 256M of RAM and 20G or 30G disks were still fairly snappy (for their main office purposes), while those that were stuck with 128M and 6G disks were only recently beginning to feel sluggish. I am just now (March 2006) phasing out 20 office desktop systems that have been running for 6 years on just that combination (though they started with Win98 in 64M). HOWEVER, if you have access to the needed media (and licenses, of course… -), Windows 2000 and Office 2000 will give you a pretty responsive system with much less hardware than that. In my limited experience, nothing in the sub-1GHz range will give a snappy (and pleasant) desktop with Linux. >drive, and it is impossible to find a usable distro >Presumably written just to provoke, but there is some ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |