Bare Minimum System Requirements - worth the upgrade?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mark Adams
  • Start date Start date
M

Mark Adams

I apologize if this is the wrong place or if this question has been
asked to death.

I have an ancient AMD-K6 233 MHz system with 64 MB of RAM that I
salvaged. I'm setting it up for my 7 y.o. son. He is going to do some
minimal web surfing/e-mail and play old DOS games on it. I'm running
into problems with the USB stuff. I could probably upgrade to Win98SE,
but the only deals I've found on eBay cost as much as the upgrade to XP!

According to Microsoft, this machine meets the bare minimum system
requirements for XP. I was wondering if it was worth springing for a
WinXP upgrade. I kind of suspect it won't since there aren't many
applications out there that will run on bare bones like this, and XP may
be hampered to the point that it's more aggravating than anything else.

Anybody out there ever tried this? If so, what's it like?
 
Hi, I would not recommend running Windows XP on that machine. Windows 98 SE
would be a much better choice for you. besides the speed decrease you will
run into, Windows XP doesn't include DOS. So XP tries to run DOS
applications on emulation. Stick with Windows 98/SE for your specific
needs.
 
By the time you buy a new OS (USB is not supported by W95 or
98). More RAM, a bigger hard drive, you need at least 2 GB
just to install XP (rough number) and then you will still
have an old computer.

You can buy a much better computer for $500 from Dell or
Gateway.


message | Hi, I would not recommend running Windows XP on that
machine. Windows 98 SE
| would be a much better choice for you. besides the speed
decrease you will
| run into, Windows XP doesn't include DOS. So XP tries to
run DOS
| applications on emulation. Stick with Windows 98/SE for
your specific
| needs.
|
| | >I apologize if this is the wrong place or if this
question has been asked
| >to death.
| >
| > I have an ancient AMD-K6 233 MHz system with 64 MB of
RAM that I salvaged.
| > I'm setting it up for my 7 y.o. son. He is going to do
some minimal web
| > surfing/e-mail and play old DOS games on it. I'm
running into problems
| > with the USB stuff. I could probably upgrade to
Win98SE, but the only
| > deals I've found on eBay cost as much as the upgrade to
XP!
| >
| > According to Microsoft, this machine meets the bare
minimum system
| > requirements for XP. I was wondering if it was worth
springing for a WinXP
| > upgrade. I kind of suspect it won't since there aren't
many applications
| > out there that will run on bare bones like this, and XP
may be hampered to
| > the point that it's more aggravating than anything else.
| >
| > Anybody out there ever tried this? If so, what's it
like?
| > --
| > Mark
| >
| > -----------------
| > If it was easy everybody would do it.
| >
|
|
 
-----Original Message-----
I apologize if this is the wrong place or if this question has been
asked to death.

I have an ancient AMD-K6 233 MHz system with 64 MB of RAM that I
salvaged. I'm setting it up for my 7 y.o. son. He is going to do some
minimal web surfing/e-mail and play old DOS games on it. I'm running
into problems with the USB stuff. I could probably upgrade to Win98SE,
but the only deals I've found on eBay cost as much as the upgrade to XP!

According to Microsoft, this machine meets the bare minimum system
requirements for XP. I was wondering if it was worth springing for a
WinXP upgrade. I kind of suspect it won't since there aren't many
applications out there that will run on bare bones like this, and XP may
be hampered to the point that it's more aggravating than anything else.

Anybody out there ever tried this? If so, what's it like?
--
Mark

-----------------
If it was easy everybody would do it.

.
Win XP has no business running on anything but a brand
Click to expand...
new machine. It will give you more headaches than it's
worth.
 
In
Mark Adams said:
I apologize if this is the wrong place or if this question has been
asked to death.

I have an ancient AMD-K6 233 MHz system with 64 MB of RAM that I
salvaged. I'm setting it up for my 7 y.o. son. He is going to do some
minimal web surfing/e-mail and play old DOS games on it. I'm running
into problems with the USB stuff. I could probably upgrade to
Win98SE, but the only deals I've found on eBay cost as much as the
upgrade to XP!

According to Microsoft, this machine meets the bare minimum system
requirements for XP. I was wondering if it was worth springing for a
WinXP upgrade. I kind of suspect it won't since there aren't many
applications out there that will run on bare bones like this, and XP
may be hampered to the point that it's more aggravating than anything
else.
Click to expand...


No, it will not come close to running satisfactorily. Bare
minimum requirements are what the name implies: it will run, but
you won't be happy with the results. The most significant lack is
in RAM. 64MB isn't close to what you need (usually at least
256MB) for decent performance.
 
In (e-mail address removed)
Win XP has no business running on anything but a brand
new machine. It will give you more headaches than it's
worth.
Click to expand...


That's nonsense. True, *his* machine is nowhere sufficient for
Windows XP. But there many many machines around that are not
brand new that run XP just fine. I have one such machine here,
which ran Windows 2000 before XP, and 98 before that.
 
Actually, Jim, USB support in Windows began with Windows 95a.
 
In
Actually, Jim, USB support in Windows began with Windows 95a.
Click to expand...


Michael, I believe you mean Windows 95b.

There was support in 95b, but it wasn't good support. Many USB
devices didn't work with it. Reliable USB support really began
with 98.
 
Yup, 95b.

I really didn't have a bad experience with 95b and USB, Ken. I tend to
think, the issue probably had a lot to do with first generation drivers for
new hardware.
 
Mark Adams said:
I apologize if this is the wrong place or if this question has been
asked to death.

I have an ancient AMD-K6 233 MHz system with 64 MB of RAM that I
salvaged. I'm setting it up for my 7 y.o. son. He is going to do some
minimal web surfing/e-mail and play old DOS games on it. I'm running
into problems with the USB stuff. I could probably upgrade to Win98SE,
but the only deals I've found on eBay cost as much as the upgrade to XP!

According to Microsoft, this machine meets the bare minimum system
requirements for XP. I was wondering if it was worth springing for a
WinXP upgrade. I kind of suspect it won't since there aren't many
applications out there that will run on bare bones like this, and XP may
be hampered to the point that it's more aggravating than anything else.

Anybody out there ever tried this? If so, what's it like?
Click to expand...

Windows XP will not "run" on that computer. It will install and it
can be used, but the word "run" is totally inappropriate for
describing the performance that you could expect. "Walk very very
slowly" would be a more appropriate but still somewhat optimistic
description.

If you enjoy going for coffee in between mouse clicks, or are happy
with launching a program then going for lunch and hopefully finding it
has finished loading by the time you get back then you might find XP
acceptable. But otherwise no.

Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."
 
Jim said:
By the time you buy a new OS (USB is not supported by W95 or
98). More RAM, a bigger hard drive, you need at least 2 GB
just to install XP (rough number) and then you will still
have an old computer.

You can buy a much better computer for $500 from Dell or
Gateway.


| | >I apologize if this is the wrong place or if this
question has been asked
| >to death.
| >
| > I have an ancient AMD-K6 233 MHz system with 64 MB of
RAM that I salvaged.
| > I'm setting it up for my 7 y.o. son. He is going to do
some minimal web
| > surfing/e-mail and play old DOS games on it. I'm
running into problems
| > with the USB stuff. I could probably upgrade to
Win98SE, but the only
| > deals I've found on eBay cost as much as the upgrade to
XP!
| >
| > According to Microsoft, this machine meets the bare
minimum system
| > requirements for XP. I was wondering if it was worth
springing for a WinXP
| > upgrade. I kind of suspect it won't since there aren't
many applications
| > out there that will run on bare bones like this, and XP
may be hampered to
| > the point that it's more aggravating than anything else.
| >
| > Anybody out there ever tried this? If so, what's it
like?
| > --
Click to expand...

That's kind of the way I see it. Thanks Jim.
 
Thanks for all the feedback. It pretty much confirms what I suspected.

Happy Holidays.

Mark
 
Thanks, I thought I'd read that it was W98 with improvements
in 98se.

But my point still stands, money spent on an old PC is
better spent on a new PC package deal.


"Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)"
| Actually, Jim, USB support in Windows began with Windows
95a.
|
| --
| Michael Solomon MS-MVP
| Windows Shell/User
| Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
| DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
|
in message
| | > By the time you buy a new OS (USB is not supported by
W95 or
| > 98). More RAM, a bigger hard drive, you need at least 2
GB
| > just to install XP (rough number) and then you will
still
| > have an old computer.
| >
| > You can buy a much better computer for $500 from Dell or
| > Gateway.
| >
| >
| > message | > | Hi, I would not recommend running Windows XP on that
| > machine. Windows 98 SE
| > | would be a much better choice for you. besides the
speed
| > decrease you will
| > | run into, Windows XP doesn't include DOS. So XP tries
to
| > run DOS
| > | applications on emulation. Stick with Windows 98/SE
for
| > your specific
| > | needs.
| > |
| > | | > | >I apologize if this is the wrong place or if this
| > question has been asked
| > | >to death.
| > | >
| > | > I have an ancient AMD-K6 233 MHz system with 64 MB
of
| > RAM that I salvaged.
| > | > I'm setting it up for my 7 y.o. son. He is going to
do
| > some minimal web
| > | > surfing/e-mail and play old DOS games on it. I'm
| > running into problems
| > | > with the USB stuff. I could probably upgrade to
| > Win98SE, but the only
| > | > deals I've found on eBay cost as much as the upgrade
to
| > XP!
| > | >
| > | > According to Microsoft, this machine meets the bare
| > minimum system
| > | > requirements for XP. I was wondering if it was worth
| > springing for a WinXP
| > | > upgrade. I kind of suspect it won't since there
aren't
| > many applications
| > | > out there that will run on bare bones like this, and
XP
| > may be hampered to
| > | > the point that it's more aggravating than anything
else.
| > | >
| > | > Anybody out there ever tried this? If so, what's it
| > like?
| > | > --
| > | > Mark
| > | >
| > | > -----------------
| > | > If it was easy everybody would do it.
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|
 
Total cost, calculate how long you'll keep it, what you will
do with it and what you might in the future.
Check the specs, many low cost computers can't be upgraded,
they lack the AGP slots and have few or no open PCI slots.

Be sure to read the specs carefully about software included.


--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
| Thanks for all the feedback. It pretty much confirms what
I suspected.
|
| Happy Holidays.
|
| Mark
|
|
| Mark Adams wrote:
| > I apologize if this is the wrong place or if this
question has been
| > asked to death.
| >
| > I have an ancient AMD-K6 233 MHz system with 64 MB of
RAM that I
| > salvaged. I'm setting it up for my 7 y.o. son. He is
going to do some
| > minimal web surfing/e-mail and play old DOS games on it.
I'm running
| > into problems with the USB stuff. I could probably
upgrade to Win98SE,
| > but the only deals I've found on eBay cost as much as
the upgrade to XP!
| >
| > According to Microsoft, this machine meets the bare
minimum system
| > requirements for XP. I was wondering if it was worth
springing for a
| > WinXP upgrade. I kind of suspect it won't since there
aren't many
| > applications out there that will run on bare bones like
this, and XP may
| > be hampered to the point that it's more aggravating than
anything else.
| >
| > Anybody out there ever tried this? If so, what's it
like?
|
| --
| Mark
|
| -----------------
| If it was easy everybody would do it.
|
 
Back
Top