Hardware Requirements for Internet PC

Discussion in 'Windows XP General' started by Searcher7, Apr 26, 2012.

  1. Searcher7

    Searcher7 Guest

    Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
    are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
    DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).

    I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
    sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
    background operations going on that I cannot find.

    I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
    installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
    good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
    anyway.

    The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
    is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
    complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
    culprit. (Not that I install much software).

    I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
    with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
    (Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
    biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
    switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
    perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
    necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
    going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
    because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
    doesn't work at all on my system).

    Any advice would be appreciated.

    Thanks.

    Darren Harris
    Staten Island, New York.
     
    Searcher7, Apr 26, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Searcher7

    BillW50 Guest

    In
    news:,
    Searcher7 wrote:
    > Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
    > are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
    > DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).
    >
    > I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
    > sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
    > background operations going on that I cannot find.
    >
    > I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
    > installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
    > good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
    > anyway.
    >
    > The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
    > is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
    > complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
    > culprit. (Not that I install much software).
    >
    > I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
    > with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
    > (Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
    > biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
    > switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
    > perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
    > necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
    > going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
    > because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
    > doesn't work at all on my system).
    >
    > Any advice would be appreciated.


    Hi Darren! Well I could configure such a machine as yours to do a fine
    job for those tasks. Although performance really jumps up with 1GB of
    memory. And depending on what kind of memory and the max that machine
    can use, it might not be too costly at all.

    The second thing I would check is CPU use. The Task Manager comes with
    all XP machines, so watch what percentage of use it runs at. Sure it
    will be jumping around depending on what you are doing. But I mean say
    on average. If it is spending most of the time at 100% or something very
    high, that is a problem. And if it is, we can tackle that one if it is.

    Another thing that can slow a computer like that one down a lot is high
    disk activity. Yes 512MB of RAM will cause lots more disk swapping than
    1GB will. But other things like AVG might be scanning the drives at boot
    or something. You can stop AVG from doing this if this is the case. And
    I used to use AVG in the past, but later versions slowed down my
    computers and I found Avast (the free one) to be very quick, so I
    switched.

    You also mentioned sluggish video with youtube. That uses Flash and the
    newer versions of Flash requires a much more powerful machines. I would
    use an older version of Flash. I usually use v9, but v8 might be ok for
    most modern day websites. Older versions can be found at:

    Old Version of Adobe Flash Player
    http://www.oldapps.com/flash_player.php

    --
    Bill
    Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
    Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3
     
    BillW50, Apr 26, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Searcher7

    BillW50 Guest

    In news:,
    David H. Lipman wrote:
    > From: "BillW50" <>
    >
    >> In
    >> news:,
    >> Searcher7 wrote:
    >>> Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware
    >>> requirements are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as
    >>> well as playing DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).
    >>>
    >>> I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
    >>> sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
    >>> background operations going on that I cannot find.
    >>>
    >>> I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
    >>> installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all
    >>> the good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get
    >>> checked again anyway.
    >>>
    >>> The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so
    >>> it is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the
    >>> increasing complexity of software that I've been using for years
    >>> may be the culprit. (Not that I install much software).
    >>>
    >>> I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
    >>> with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
    >>> (Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But
    >>> the biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing
    >>> with switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every
    >>> operation I perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get
    >>> hung up, necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot.
    >>> Sometimes going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of
    >>> the PC case because the pc case on/off button will not work.
    >>> ("Ctrl+Alt+Del" doesn't work at all on my system).
    >>>
    >>> Any advice would be appreciated.

    >>
    >> Hi Darren! Well I could configure such a machine as yours to do a
    >> fine job for those tasks. Although performance really jumps up with
    >> 1GB of memory. And depending on what kind of memory and the max that
    >> machine can use, it might not be too costly at all.
    >>
    >> The second thing I would check is CPU use. The Task Manager comes
    >> with all XP machines, so watch what percentage of use it runs at.
    >> Sure it will be jumping around depending on what you are doing. But
    >> I mean say on average. If it is spending most of the time at 100% or
    >> something very high, that is a problem. And if it is, we can tackle
    >> that one if it is. Another thing that can slow a computer like that
    >> one down a lot is
    >> high disk activity. Yes 512MB of RAM will cause lots more disk
    >> swapping than 1GB will. But other things like AVG might be scanning
    >> the drives at boot or something. You can stop AVG from doing this if
    >> this is the case. And I used to use AVG in the past, but later
    >> versions slowed down my computers and I found Avast (the free one)
    >> to be very quick, so I switched. You also mentioned sluggish video
    >> with youtube. That uses Flash and
    >> the newer versions of Flash requires a much more powerful machines.
    >> I would use an older version of Flash. I usually use v9, but v8
    >> might be ok for most modern day websites. Older versions can be
    >> found at: Old Version of Adobe Flash Player
    >> http://www.oldapps.com/flash_player.php

    >
    > You don't need Flash to play YouTube videos. I play them in VLC
    > Player.


    VLC plays in your browser? How? Sure VLC could play them if you download
    them.

    > Do NOT use old versions of Flash. Doing so will have a high
    > probability of the computer being compromised. Either use the latest
    > version or none at all.


    Yes I have heard that before. Older versions of Flash have many security
    holes in them. Either I am very lucky or I don't visit pirate or porn
    websites or something. Also real time AV scanners are supposed to be
    scanning every port on your computer anyway. And if something does try
    to sneak in through a security hole, it is supposed to block it anyway.

    And I have been running Windows since '93 and I haven't been infected
    yet. Although I have worked on a lot of computers that were and I
    cleaned them all up. ;-)

    --
    Bill
    Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
    Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3
     
    BillW50, Apr 26, 2012
    #3
  4. Searcher7

    Bob Willard Guest

    On 4/26/2012 2:33 PM, BillW50 wrote:
    > In news:,
    > David H. Lipman wrote:
    >> From: "BillW50"<>
    >>
    >>> In
    >>> news:,
    >>> Searcher7 wrote:
    >>>> Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware
    >>>> requirements are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as
    >>>> well as playing DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).
    >>>>
    >>>> I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
    >>>> sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
    >>>> background operations going on that I cannot find.
    >>>>
    >>>> I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
    >>>> installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all
    >>>> the good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get
    >>>> checked again anyway.
    >>>>
    >>>> The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so
    >>>> it is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the
    >>>> increasing complexity of software that I've been using for years
    >>>> may be the culprit. (Not that I install much software).
    >>>>
    >>>> I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
    >>>> with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
    >>>> (Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But
    >>>> the biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing
    >>>> with switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every
    >>>> operation I perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get
    >>>> hung up, necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot.
    >>>> Sometimes going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of
    >>>> the PC case because the pc case on/off button will not work.
    >>>> ("Ctrl+Alt+Del" doesn't work at all on my system).
    >>>>
    >>>> Any advice would be appreciated.
    >>>
    >>> Hi Darren! Well I could configure such a machine as yours to do a
    >>> fine job for those tasks. Although performance really jumps up with
    >>> 1GB of memory. And depending on what kind of memory and the max that
    >>> machine can use, it might not be too costly at all.
    >>>
    >>> The second thing I would check is CPU use. The Task Manager comes
    >>> with all XP machines, so watch what percentage of use it runs at.
    >>> Sure it will be jumping around depending on what you are doing. But
    >>> I mean say on average. If it is spending most of the time at 100% or
    >>> something very high, that is a problem. And if it is, we can tackle
    >>> that one if it is. Another thing that can slow a computer like that
    >>> one down a lot is
    >>> high disk activity. Yes 512MB of RAM will cause lots more disk
    >>> swapping than 1GB will. But other things like AVG might be scanning
    >>> the drives at boot or something. You can stop AVG from doing this if
    >>> this is the case. And I used to use AVG in the past, but later
    >>> versions slowed down my computers and I found Avast (the free one)
    >>> to be very quick, so I switched. You also mentioned sluggish video
    >>> with youtube. That uses Flash and
    >>> the newer versions of Flash requires a much more powerful machines.
    >>> I would use an older version of Flash. I usually use v9, but v8
    >>> might be ok for most modern day websites. Older versions can be
    >>> found at: Old Version of Adobe Flash Player
    >>> http://www.oldapps.com/flash_player.php

    >>
    >> You don't need Flash to play YouTube videos. I play them in VLC
    >> Player.

    >
    > VLC plays in your browser? How? Sure VLC could play them if you download
    > them.
    >
    >> Do NOT use old versions of Flash. Doing so will have a high
    >> probability of the computer being compromised. Either use the latest
    >> version or none at all.

    >
    > Yes I have heard that before. Older versions of Flash have many security
    > holes in them. Either I am very lucky or I don't visit pirate or porn
    > websites or something. Also real time AV scanners are supposed to be
    > scanning every port on your computer anyway. And if something does try
    > to sneak in through a security hole, it is supposed to block it anyway.
    >
    > And I have been running Windows since '93 and I haven't been infected
    > yet. Although I have worked on a lot of computers that were and I
    > cleaned them all up. ;-)
    >


    512MB with XP SP3 is pretty skimpy. XP's demands for RAM did grow from
    the original to SP3. If you don't want to spend on a new PC, then I
    suggest more RAM -- lots more RAM -- to compensate for your rather slow
    CPU. Since RAM is cheap, I'd pour in as much as your MoBo can handle:
    4GB if possible, but at least 2GB.

    Also, make sure you have a bunch of unused HD space, to avoid slowdowns
    due to fragmentation. If your HD is more than 50% full, it may be
    advisable to throw in the towel and get a modern PC. (I don't usually
    push PC replacement -- I still use a 500 MHz Win98 PC for some stuff --
    but a slow PC with a small RAM may be due to go.)

    One more trade-off to consider: turn off the realtime feature of your
    AV app, to improve file access time. On my primary PC, I have AVG and
    AdAware and SpyBot set to run every night (and I run MalWareBytes and
    SuperAntiSpyware a couple of times a week); enough protection so that I
    don't feel the need to run any realtime AV.
    --
    Cheers, Bob
     
    Bob Willard, Apr 26, 2012
    #4
  5. Searcher7

    BillW50 Guest

    In news:jnc5l1$o1b$,
    Bob Willard wrote:
    > On 4/26/2012 2:33 PM, BillW50 wrote:
    >> In news:,
    >> David H. Lipman wrote:
    >>> From: "BillW50"<>
    >>>
    >>>> In
    >>>> news:,
    >>>> Searcher7 wrote:
    >>>>> Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware
    >>>>> requirements are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet,
    >>>>> as well as playing DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
    >>>>> sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot
    >>>>> of background operations going on that I cannot find.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
    >>>>> installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all
    >>>>> the good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get
    >>>>> checked again anyway.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so
    >>>>> it is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the
    >>>>> increasing complexity of software that I've been using for years
    >>>>> may be the culprit. (Not that I install much software).
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse
    >>>>> issues with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my
    >>>>> connection. (Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a
    >>>>> problem). But the biggest problem involves random freezing of my
    >>>>> cursor, freezing with switching between tabs, freezing when
    >>>>> typing, etc. Every operation I perform with the mouse or keyboard
    >>>>> can randomly get hung up, necessitating a waiting period. At
    >>>>> worse I have to reboot. Sometimes going as far as having to pull
    >>>>> the plug out the back of the PC case because the pc case on/off
    >>>>> button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del" doesn't work at all on my
    >>>>> system). Any advice would be appreciated.
    >>>>
    >>>> Hi Darren! Well I could configure such a machine as yours to do a
    >>>> fine job for those tasks. Although performance really jumps up with
    >>>> 1GB of memory. And depending on what kind of memory and the max
    >>>> that machine can use, it might not be too costly at all.
    >>>>
    >>>> The second thing I would check is CPU use. The Task Manager comes
    >>>> with all XP machines, so watch what percentage of use it runs at.
    >>>> Sure it will be jumping around depending on what you are doing. But
    >>>> I mean say on average. If it is spending most of the time at 100%
    >>>> or something very high, that is a problem. And if it is, we can
    >>>> tackle that one if it is. Another thing that can slow a computer
    >>>> like that one down a lot is
    >>>> high disk activity. Yes 512MB of RAM will cause lots more disk
    >>>> swapping than 1GB will. But other things like AVG might be scanning
    >>>> the drives at boot or something. You can stop AVG from doing this
    >>>> if this is the case. And I used to use AVG in the past, but later
    >>>> versions slowed down my computers and I found Avast (the free one)
    >>>> to be very quick, so I switched. You also mentioned sluggish video
    >>>> with youtube. That uses Flash and
    >>>> the newer versions of Flash requires a much more powerful machines.
    >>>> I would use an older version of Flash. I usually use v9, but v8
    >>>> might be ok for most modern day websites. Older versions can be
    >>>> found at: Old Version of Adobe Flash Player
    >>>> http://www.oldapps.com/flash_player.php
    >>>
    >>> You don't need Flash to play YouTube videos. I play them in VLC
    >>> Player.

    >>
    >> VLC plays in your browser? How? Sure VLC could play them if you
    >> download them.
    >>
    >>> Do NOT use old versions of Flash. Doing so will have a high
    >>> probability of the computer being compromised. Either use the
    >>> latest version or none at all.

    >>
    >> Yes I have heard that before. Older versions of Flash have many
    >> security holes in them. Either I am very lucky or I don't visit
    >> pirate or porn websites or something. Also real time AV scanners are
    >> supposed to be scanning every port on your computer anyway. And if
    >> something does try to sneak in through a security hole, it is
    >> supposed to block it anyway. And I have been running Windows since
    >> '93 and I haven't been infected
    >> yet. Although I have worked on a lot of computers that were and I
    >> cleaned them all up. ;-)

    >
    > 512MB with XP SP3 is pretty skimpy. XP's demands for RAM did grow
    > from the original to SP3. If you don't want to spend on a new PC,
    > then I suggest more RAM -- lots more RAM -- to compensate for your
    > rather slow CPU. Since RAM is cheap, I'd pour in as much as your
    > MoBo can handle: 4GB if possible, but at least 2GB.
    >
    > Also, make sure you have a bunch of unused HD space, to avoid
    > slowdowns due to fragmentation. If your HD is more than 50% full, it
    > may be advisable to throw in the towel and get a modern PC. (I don't
    > usually push PC replacement -- I still use a 500 MHz Win98 PC for
    > some stuff -- but a slow PC with a small RAM may be due to go.)
    >
    > One more trade-off to consider: turn off the realtime feature of your
    > AV app, to improve file access time. On my primary PC, I have AVG and
    > AdAware and SpyBot set to run every night (and I run MalWareBytes and
    > SuperAntiSpyware a couple of times a week); enough protection so that
    > I don't feel the need to run any realtime AV.


    Since I have found security updates to cause stability problems and
    incompatibilities, I *really* rely mostly on real time AV scanning. So I
    would be a bit concern about turning it off. But I admit that about once
    or twice a year that Avast flags and blocks a malicious website trying
    to pass something through a security hole. So maybe I am more worried
    than I should be.

    Avast is also really light on using up your computer's resources. For
    example AnVir tells me the worst Avast used was using 30% of the CPU in
    the past hour and that was only for a second. The rest of the time it
    was under 1%. I quit using AVG because later versions got very hoggish
    over the resources and tied up the computer.

    --
    Bill
    Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
    Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3
     
    BillW50, Apr 26, 2012
    #5
  6. "Searcher7" <2.com> wrote in message
    news:...

    > Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
    > are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
    > DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).


    Your cheapest option is a refurbished office machine 3 to 5
    years old, e.g. IBM model M52, nowawadays widely available
    for about $100, with 2.6 MHz CPU and at least 1 Gb RAM,
    preferably more. These were built for only a single hard drive,
    but two 2 DVD drive bays, one usually empty, so you can add
    your old hard drive there: and later swap it for a Terabyte size
    drive if you like.

    --
    Don Phillipson
    Carlsbad Springs
    (Ottawa, Canada)
     
    Don Phillipson, Apr 26, 2012
    #6
  7. Per Bob Willard:
    > If your HD is more than 50% full, it may be
    >advisable to throw in the towel and get a modern PC.


    One cause of a full C: drive that I have seen is Windows Updates.

    Every update takes a little disc space for it's backup files and
    after a few years, it can add up to enough to cause a problem
    that was fixed by deleting all the backup folders like
    C:\Windows\$NtUninstallKB971029$,
    --
    Pete Cresswell
     
    (PeteCresswell), Apr 27, 2012
    #7
  8. Searcher7

    Yes Guest

    Searcher7 wrote:

    > Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
    > are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
    > DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).
    >
    > I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
    > sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
    > background operations going on that I cannot find.
    >
    > I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
    > installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
    > good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
    > anyway.
    >
    > The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
    > is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
    > complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
    > culprit. (Not that I install much software).
    >
    > I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
    > with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
    > (Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
    > biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
    > switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
    > perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
    > necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
    > going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
    > because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
    > doesn't work at all on my system).
    >
    > Any advice would be appreciated.
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Darren Harris
    > Staten Island, New York.


    The others have given good advice, but I agree with the suggestion
    about Task Manager. Underneath processes tab you can see the processes
    taht are running and both CPU usage and memory usage that can give you
    clues. The performance tab gives more info.

    Which version of XP are you using and have you installed SP3? Are you
    re-installing from the XP install CD? During the install process, you
    can use the advanced choices and be more selective about what software
    options you install.

    Is your graphics card an integrated circuit built onto the mobo or is
    it a stand-alone card? If it's built in, it's more than likely using
    part of your system's 512Mb memory and slowing things down somewhat.

    As someone mentioned, pagefile size could also be slowing down your pc.
    IIRC, you can check out how much it's allocating on your HD looking
    under system, IIRC, for system environmentals and manually change it if
    it seems excessive. I think the rule of thumb was a multiple of your
    memory size. You'll need to check that out.

    The 512Mb RAM is(was) Microsoft's recommended minimum, so more RAM can
    help. Your mobo determines how much more RAM you could add if you go
    that route. In any case, the max that XP (32 bit, IDK about 64 bit)
    can take advantage of is 4Gb. Repeating my caveat, your mobo may not
    be able to take that.

    Others have mentioned AVG and Avast. I used AVG for a long time but
    got fed up with it because it hogged my pc's resources. I have no
    experience with Avast. I use Microsoft's Security Essentials and am
    satisfied. It too is free and MS updates the definitions fairly
    regularly.

    WRT internet connection speed, you could try DSLReports. At one time
    they could test your speed connection. Or pinging your localhost and
    your ISP to look at response times might give you some idea.

    For troubleshooting, if you're going to try another re-install (I
    assume you do a clean re-install, btw), I would suggest not doing it
    while connected to the net. Why give someone a free shot? It also
    means that you want to install your AV s/w before connecting your pc to
    the net.

    You might also find, d/l and run a piece of software that inventories
    the hardware and software on your pc. I use the freeware version of
    System Information for Windows (SIW), but I'm sure there are several
    other programs out there that do the same thing. That could give you a
    start at answering hardware questions that were asked such as about
    your CPU and mobo. Not to mention it's handy info to have for times
    such as now :)

    I noticed one other thing. You think the problem might be the
    complexity of the s/w you install, but you don't say what you're
    installing. It might be advisable to install your other software in
    stages if you have the luxury. Your info doesn't indicate if your pc
    bogs down before or after adding the other s/w. So it is not
    immediately apparent (at least to me) if the problem arises after
    installing WinXP and before installing the other software you're using.

    And check what percentage of your hd is being used for software. My
    experience is that the more that your hd is filled up, the slower
    things go period. If you do a right click on the folder for your
    drive, a window pops up that gives you info about how much space your
    drive has and how much is being used.

    John
     
    Yes, Apr 27, 2012
    #8
  9. Searcher7

    DK Guest

    In article <>, Searcher7 <2.com> wrote:
    >Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
    >are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
    >DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).


    Internet today is stuffed to the max with all kind of crap, requiring
    pretty fast computer to run smoothly. Don't settle for minimum
    hardware requrements because software developers will surely
    find a way to make even more complex software that will require
    better hardware. It's an arms race. For an end user, the speed
    of everyday computing remained more or less constant over
    the past decade (or even two).

    Five years ago your machine ran Youtube videos just fine.
    Today's Youtube is "improved" and so your computer no longer
    keeps up with it. In 95% of the cases, end users ask for none of
    these improvements. But it's the stuff that makes people buy
    new computer hardware and ensures profits for hardware amd
    software industries.

    DK
     
    DK, Apr 27, 2012
    #9
  10. Searcher7

    DK Guest

    In article <>, "(PeteCresswell)" <> wrote:
    >Per Bob Willard:
    >> If your HD is more than 50% full, it may be
    >>advisable to throw in the towel and get a modern PC.

    >
    >One cause of a full C: drive that I have seen is Windows Updates.
    >
    >Every update takes a little disc space for it's backup files and
    >after a few years, it can add up to enough to cause a problem
    >that was fixed by deleting all the backup folders like
    >C:\Windows\$NtUninstallKB971029$,


    And don't forget to delete all of the downloaded fixes that
    Windows keeps in
    C:\WINDOWS\SoftwareDistribution\Download

    *Everything* in this directory can be safely deleted after
    successful update and reboot.

    DK
     
    DK, Apr 27, 2012
    #10
  11. Searcher7

    Paul Guest

    (PeteCresswell) wrote:
    > Per Bob Willard:
    >> If your HD is more than 50% full, it may be
    >> advisable to throw in the towel and get a modern PC.

    >
    > One cause of a full C: drive that I have seen is Windows Updates.
    >
    > Every update takes a little disc space for it's backup files and
    > after a few years, it can add up to enough to cause a problem
    > that was fixed by deleting all the backup folders like
    > C:\Windows\$NtUninstallKB971029$,


    I added together all of those folders, and got 1.24GB. I've
    never touched mine, and that is how much delta there is with
    respect to an SP3 CD install.

    How small a drive would you need, to get it filled up that way ?

    I could see that happening, if I was still using my 12 year old
    4GB WD IDE drive, but 1.24GB is a drop in the bucket for anything
    a bit newer.

    If you want to review storage on your PC, in a visual way, you
    can use SequoiaView. Instantly, you'll see the pagefile and hiberfil,
    as fairly large with respect to the rest, but may also be able to spot
    data files that can be moved to another partition or to another disk.

    http://w3.win.tue.nl/nl/onderzoek/onderzoek_informatica/visualization/sequoiaview//

    http://w3.win.tue.nl/uploads/media/Sequoia3.1Install.zip

    Paul
     
    Paul, Apr 27, 2012
    #11
  12. Searcher7

    Paul Guest

    Searcher7 wrote:
    > Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
    > are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
    > DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).
    >
    > I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
    > sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
    > background operations going on that I cannot find.
    >
    > I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
    > installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
    > good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
    > anyway.
    >
    > The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
    > is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
    > complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
    > culprit. (Not that I install much software).
    >
    > I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
    > with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
    > (Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
    > biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
    > switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
    > perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
    > necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
    > going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
    > because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
    > doesn't work at all on my system).
    >
    > Any advice would be appreciated.
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Darren Harris
    > Staten Island, New York.


    Control-Alt-Delete brings up Task Manager on my PC.

    If that isn't working, that in itself could indicate malware.

    Keep Task Manager up on your screen while you are working, and watch the
    display during a random freeze. Yes, the Task Manager may also be frozen,
    but watch the display for the first update after it unfreezes, and see
    if some process happened to be running 100% at the time.

    It could be something as simple as a bad hard drive.

    *******

    900MHz is not enough for any arbitrary video playback. 1.5GHz
    is on the border of offering acceptable video playback, but some
    formats or resolutions may still be left wanting (frame drop).
    (This is based on some VIA mini-ITX designs, where the users
    are on the edge of enjoyable video playback.)

    The video card helps with some of these things. For example, I
    had a couple older video cards, one of which did not support
    a scaler for video playback. With a hardware scaler, you can
    make full-screen video, with virtually no additional CPU cycles.
    Without the hardware scaler, it took 40% of a 3GHz P4 processor
    to do the scaling operation (fill the screen). So getting a
    decent video card, can also make a difference to the user
    experience.

    A video card doesn't have to be expensive, to add these things.
    But some of the features, are "gated" by the hardware interface
    type used to plug in the video card. For example, the video card
    driver may decide to disable 3:2 pulldown, if it detects the
    card isn't in a PCI Express x16 slot, as opposed to a PCI Express x1
    slot or a PCI slot. So when you pick up an "improved" video card,
    even then, the manufacturer may rob you of some of the joy, based
    on the interface type available for the card, on the motherboard.

    With a new motherboard, with at least one PCI Express x16 video slot,
    you can fit a $50 video card, and gain access to some of those
    features. It will still take newer software (player software),
    to use the features. The features don't tend to make ancient software
    work faster. Adobe Flash, has had hardware acceleration for a number
    of releases, but even that, occasionally you have to turn off
    the hardware acceleration in the flash control panel, due to issues.
    Some day, when Adobe Flash dies and all we've got is HTML5, there
    will again be opportunities for hardware acceleration (via that video
    card).

    *******

    I've done a couple "motherboard-CPU-RAM" upgrades, and generally
    they can be done for under $300 with some very careful shopping.
    DDR3 RAM now is dirt cheap, so the RAM is almost free.

    This advert is intended to show how cheap a kit can be. I am not
    promoting this particular purchase, because it contains stuff
    you don't need. The part I wanted you to be impressed with, is
    the $280 that is giving you a new motherboard, CPU, and RAM. It's
    one of their cheapest barebone kits. The CPU is Athlon II X3 445,
    which was considered to be one of the cheapest CPU upgrades
    you could do (looking at a curve of CPU performance versus price).

    http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2262855&Sku=B69-0542

    We can look at the price/performance here, to see how the 445 rates.
    You can see some of the Athlon II x3 and x4 processors, were in the
    $65 to $80 price range. So that's what you'd be looking for in an
    upgrade. Something high on a chart like that (depending on what
    is still available for purchase).

    http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_alltime.html

    OK, here's a 450 for sale for $78.

    Athlon II X3 450 Rana 3.2GHz Socket AM3 95W
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103886

    Here is a motherboard for $60. The only thing I have against
    Biostar, is their practice in the past of shorting 12V1 to 12V2,
    which is not a good idea (it depends on the power supply, as to
    how well that would be tolerated). This motherboard is a microATX,
    so might be small enough to fit in your existing computer case.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813138283

    This is an Asus motherboard for $80. MicroATX. Room for a video card.
    But also has built-in video. You don't have to buy a new video
    card, for an initial test. If you like how the system works without
    a video card, then it's fine as is. The back of the motherboard
    (I/O plate) has DVI and VGA connectors for video, coming from
    the 880G chipset.

    ASUS M4A88T-M AM3 AMD 880G HDMI Micro ATX $80
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131657

    You can get 4GB of RAM for $29. That's all that WinXP 32 bit can
    handle anyway.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820104203

    So my total, if I go with the Asus motherboard, is 78+80+29= $187

    *******
    You should always look at the motherboard manual, for gotchas.
    The support.asus.com web site has info, such as this manual.
    On PDF page 20 ("1-8"), is a diagram of the motherboard. The
    ATX12V power connector, is a 2x2 shape with four pins, and it
    powers the motherboard. Your 900MHz computer, may not have
    that power connector on the power supply.

    http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/socketAM3/M4A88T-M/E5907_M4A88T-M.zip

    A possible substitute power supply, would be one by Sparkle.
    It doesn't come with an AC power cord (thus the words "OEM",
    meaning "cheap-ass-cheap"). It isn't the perfect supply, but
    its a reasonable low-end choice. I have this as a replacement
    for my oldest system. I couldn't find a decent choice locally,
    and ordered one of these off the net.

    SPARKLE ATX-400PN-B204 400W ATX 12V 2.2 Power Supply - OEM $45
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817103013

    +3.3V @ 30A, +5V @ 28A, +12V1 @ 18A, +12V2 @ 18A, -12V @ 0.5A, +5VSB @ 2.0A

    That should have plenty of power for a low end build.

    1 x Main connector (20+4Pin) <-- main connector is 24 pins, but splits into two
    1 x 12V (P4) <-- this is the ATX12V 2x2 connector (two yellow, two black wires)
    5 x peripheral
    1 x SATA <-- my B204 has four SATA power, which I don't use
    1 x Floppy
    1 x PCI-E <-- 2x3 power connector, for mid range gamer video

    If you're making up an order for your upgrade, then throw a couple
    Y cables into the order, just in case. That'll help, if you
    need a bit of extra reach for some wiring. The wiring in my
    old system, is too tangled to see how many "Y" cables I used :)

    This is an example of a Y cable. This one has good construction, but
    a poor price ($11 !!!). We used to be able to get stuff like this for
    around $3. The cheap ones, they could use a smaller diameter wire, which
    isn't the best. You may have to shop a bit more, to find one
    which is well made (no "splice tubing"). I try to have a couple
    spares like this around, before doing a build, just in case the
    wiring is too short, or I need more connectors.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812196309

    Our system upgrade price was $187, and has now ballooned to $252 with
    the addition of a $45 power supply and a couple $10 cables thrown in.

    The motherboard has a PS/2 keyboard connector, but no PS/2 mouse connector.
    You might need a USB capable mouse, to complete the build.

    Here's a USB mouse for $12. Now we're up to $264 plus shipping.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826104370

    *******

    The hardest part, is the details of the OS.

    Since you refer to "after a new XP install", that implies you have
    a real OS installation disc, and perhaps there is a migration
    path for you to upgrade your hardware, and still get WinXP to
    activate.

    If you had a Dell, the OS wouldn't be installing on the new motherboard.
    And then, that part would be most of the challenge (solving the
    OS problem).

    When the system is built up, you enter the BIOS and set the
    disk interfaces in IDE mode. That's to negate the need for
    any "press F6 and install driver" step. Since the motherboard
    has no floppy interface, we'd have no way to install any
    optional WinXP drivers. Which means sticking with bog-standard
    BIOS settings, if at all possible.

    So far, we've spent $264 on an upgrade, and got at least a 4x
    speed improvement (assuming pessimistic single-threaded coding
    in the software). That ought to help a bit.

    If you want to shop for a video card later, there's a single
    video slot on the motherboard for that. And then, you'd look
    for a modern video card at a decent price.

    For example, this is an ATI card for $28. HD 5450.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131339

    650MHz core clock, 80 Stream Processing Units
    (Cedar Radeоn HD 5400 Series UVD 2.2 video decoder)

    And an Nvidia card for $45. GT 520

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121475

    810MHz core clock, 48 CUDA Cores
    (GT 520, Purevideo VP5 video decoder)

    But you'd only shop for one of those later, as the motherboard
    graphics should be tested first, to see if they satisfy your
    needs or not, without spending more money on a video card.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Apr 27, 2012
    #12
  13. Searcher7

    PeterC Guest

    On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 03:53:15 -0400, Paul wrote:

    > Control-Alt-Delete brings up Task Manager on my PC.


    Control-Shift-Esc does it on XP (at least) and, I feel, is a little less
    fraught than the usual 3-fingered salute.
    --
    Peter.
    The gods will stay away
    whilst religions hold sway
     
    PeterC, Apr 27, 2012
    #13
  14. Searcher7

    Jon Danniken Guest

    David H. Lipman wrote:
    >
    > You don't need Flash to play YouTube videos. I play them in VLC
    > Player.


    How? Are you downloading them, or parsing the URL in VLC?

    Jon
     
    Jon Danniken, Apr 27, 2012
    #14
  15. On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:40:53 +0100, PeterC
    <> wrote:

    > On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 03:53:15 -0400, Paul wrote:
    >
    > > Control-Alt-Delete brings up Task Manager on my PC.

    >
    > Control-Shift-Esc does it on XP (at least) and, I feel, is a little less
    > fraught than the usual 3-fingered salute.



    Control-Shift-Esc works on Windows 7, too. But I usually prefer to
    right-click on a blank part of the Task Bar and choose "Start Task
    Manager."

    Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP
     
    Ken Blake, MVP, Apr 27, 2012
    #15
  16. Searcher7

    Paul Guest

    Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
    > On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:40:53 +0100, PeterC
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 03:53:15 -0400, Paul wrote:
    >>
    >>> Control-Alt-Delete brings up Task Manager on my PC.

    >> Control-Shift-Esc does it on XP (at least) and, I feel, is a little less
    >> fraught than the usual 3-fingered salute.

    >
    >
    > Control-Shift-Esc works on Windows 7, too. But I usually prefer to
    > right-click on a blank part of the Task Bar and choose "Start Task
    > Manager."
    >
    > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP


    The original complaint, quoted from the OP was:

    "Ctrl+Alt+Del" doesn't work at all on my system

    As far as I know, it should work, and the system should respond.
    It can be disabled, and it's possible malware could disable it.

    On my WinXP machine, Ctrl+Alt+Del causes Task Manager to appear.
    The fourth tab over in Task Manager, has options such as "Restart".

    Ctrl+Alt+Del might even work in the BIOS - if you needed to test it,
    you could give it a try there and see what happens (as a "keyboard test").
    I think if I'm in the popup boot menu of my BIOS, it works there to
    cause the BIOS to POST again.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Apr 27, 2012
    #16
  17. Searcher7

    glee Guest

    "Searcher7" <2.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
    > are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
    > DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).
    >
    > I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
    > sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
    > background operations going on that I cannot find.
    >
    > I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
    > installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
    > good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
    > anyway.
    >
    > The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
    > is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
    > complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
    > culprit. (Not that I install much software).
    >
    > I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
    > with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
    > (Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
    > biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
    > switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
    > perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
    > necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
    > going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
    > because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
    > doesn't work at all on my system).
    >
    > Any advice would be appreciated.
    >
    > Thanks.


    Perhaps I missed it in one of the replies, but I did not see anyone
    suggest running a hard drive diagnostic to test the hard drive. On a
    machine of that age, especially if the hard drive is the original, that
    should be the FIRST thing you do, after backing up any important data to
    other media.

    If you don't know the brand of your hard drive, you can use Hitachi
    Drive Fitness Test (DFT) on almost any brand drive.
    http://www.hitachigst.com/support/downloads/#DFT

    --
    Glen Ventura
    MS MVP Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009
    CompTIA A+
     
    glee, Apr 27, 2012
    #17
  18. Searcher7

    BillW50 Guest

    In news:jndj9c$nc5$,
    Paul wrote:
    > Control-Alt-Delete brings up Task Manager on my PC.
    >
    > If that isn't working, that in itself could indicate malware.
    >
    > Keep Task Manager up on your screen while you are working, and watch
    > the display during a random freeze. Yes, the Task Manager may also be
    > frozen, but watch the display for the first update after it unfreezes,
    > and see if some process happened to be running 100% at the time.
    >
    > It could be something as simple as a bad hard drive.


    I wish DPCs would show up in the Task Manager list. As when you have
    high DPC usage you can see the CPU is busy, but you can't find out why
    with the Task Manager. Although Process Explorer will show them.

    > *******
    >
    > 900MHz is not enough for any arbitrary video playback. 1.5GHz
    > is on the border of offering acceptable video playback, but some
    > formats or resolutions may still be left wanting (frame drop).
    > (This is based on some VIA mini-ITX designs, where the users
    > are on the edge of enjoyable video playback.)
    >
    > The video card helps with some of these things. For example, I
    > had a couple older video cards, one of which did not support
    > a scaler for video playback. With a hardware scaler, you can
    > make full-screen video, with virtually no additional CPU cycles.
    > Without the hardware scaler, it took 40% of a 3GHz P4 processor
    > to do the scaling operation (fill the screen). So getting a
    > decent video card, can also make a difference to the user
    > experience.
    >
    > A video card doesn't have to be expensive, to add these things.
    > But some of the features, are "gated" by the hardware interface
    > type used to plug in the video card. For example, the video card
    > driver may decide to disable 3:2 pulldown, if it detects the
    > card isn't in a PCI Express x16 slot, as opposed to a PCI Express x1
    > slot or a PCI slot. So when you pick up an "improved" video card,
    > even then, the manufacturer may rob you of some of the joy, based
    > on the interface type available for the card, on the motherboard.
    >
    > With a new motherboard, with at least one PCI Express x16 video slot,
    > you can fit a $50 video card, and gain access to some of those
    > features. It will still take newer software (player software),
    > to use the features. The features don't tend to make ancient software
    > work faster. Adobe Flash, has had hardware acceleration for a number
    > of releases, but even that, occasionally you have to turn off
    > the hardware acceleration in the flash control panel, due to issues.
    > Some day, when Adobe Flash dies and all we've got is HTML5, there
    > will again be opportunities for hardware acceleration (via that video
    > card).


    I disagree that 900MHz isn't enough for any arbitrary video playback. As
    my two uses a 400MHz Celeron with a very wimpy Trident Cyber 9525 video
    with only 2.5 MB of video RAM. And under Windows 98, it has enough power
    to keep up with full screen DVD playback and can handle youtube video
    streams up to 700k. Under Windows 2000, it is terrible. As now it can
    only handle streams up to 100k.

    Also most of my laptops support SpeedStep. And most of that time, they
    operate at the slowest clock speed. And that means for this one the CPU
    is running at 991MHz. And even at this slow clock speed, it too can
    handle arbitrary video playback without a problem.

    My Asus EeePC 701/2 netbooks are underclocked to 633MHz. And they too
    can keep up with arbitrary video playback without missing a beat under
    Windows XP, even on an external monitor running 1440x900. Oddly enough,
    Linux on the same machine can't even come close.

    --
    Bill
    Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
    Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3
     
    BillW50, Apr 28, 2012
    #18
  19. Searcher7

    BillW50 Guest

    In news:YNomr.450$,
    DK wrote:
    > In article
    > <>,
    > Searcher7 <2.com> wrote:
    >> Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
    >> are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as
    >> playing DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).

    >
    > Internet today is stuffed to the max with all kind of crap, requiring
    > pretty fast computer to run smoothly. Don't settle for minimum
    > hardware requrements because software developers will surely
    > find a way to make even more complex software that will require
    > better hardware. It's an arms race. For an end user, the speed
    > of everyday computing remained more or less constant over
    > the past decade (or even two).
    >
    > Five years ago your machine ran Youtube videos just fine.
    > Today's Youtube is "improved" and so your computer no longer
    > keeps up with it. In 95% of the cases, end users ask for none of
    > these improvements. But it's the stuff that makes people buy
    > new computer hardware and ensures profits for hardware amd
    > software industries.


    This used to be true. As back in the 80's and 90's if your machine was 5
    years old, it was now way too slow for newer software.

    Although something happened really special somewhere at the end of '06
    and just before Vista was released. As memory was very cheap and
    multicore machines was plentiful. And XP was enjoying a long run and it
    still continues somewhat.

    I now have 16 laptops from this era alone. I love them. As they can run
    older software and all of the newer software as well. You can run older
    Windows and even the latest Windows 8 on them. I consider them the best
    of the best. And so far, I have no interest in running any machine newer
    than this. Nor do the newer machines offer me anything I am interest in
    and won't run any of my stuff any faster than what I am doing right now.

    I don't recall anything like this in PC history. Okay the Commodore 64
    did sell for over 10 years without much in the way of changes. But that
    is the closest thing I can think of to compare it with.

    --
    Bill
    Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
    Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3
     
    BillW50, Apr 28, 2012
    #19
  20. Searcher7

    BillW50 Guest

    In news:1hh4ig1ot5rl4$,
    PeterC wrote:
    > On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 03:53:15 -0400, Paul wrote:
    >
    >> Control-Alt-Delete brings up Task Manager on my PC.

    >
    > Control-Shift-Esc does it on XP (at least) and, I feel, is a little
    > less fraught than the usual 3-fingered salute.


    Earlier Windows versions, double clicking on the desktop popped up
    something. I don't recall what it was now. Was it the Task Manager?

    --
    Bill
    Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
    Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3
     
    BillW50, Apr 28, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Vance Roos

    Add Hardware Wizard can't find hardware

    Vance Roos, Aug 20, 2003, in forum: Windows XP General
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    396
    Vance Roos
    Aug 20, 2003
  2. Carey Frisch  [MVP]

    Re: What are the minimum hardware requirements to run XP Pro

    Carey Frisch [MVP], Mar 17, 2004, in forum: Windows XP General
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    245
    Li'l Roberto
    Mar 18, 2004
  3. Plato
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    216
    Plato
    Mar 17, 2004
  4. Neal
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    249
    Plato
    Mar 17, 2004
  5. Ken Blake, MVP

    Re: What are the minimum hardware requirements to run XP Pro

    Ken Blake, MVP, Mar 17, 2004, in forum: Windows XP General
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    240
    Ron Martell
    Mar 18, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page