OT computers

Page 4 of 12  
On Sunday, March 30, 2014 11:12:16 PM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:

Actually the question was this:
"My machine is old, 12 yrs to be exact. I do believe my hard drive is dying. Wouldn't mind keeping my monitor, but would like to increase memory, speed, etc. And, specifically would like all my information put on the new system. I really like Outlook Express, but have heard it is not available anymore. "
Maybe

Irrelevant. Given the stated issues, it's time for a new PC. Since Outlook Express is no longer supported, he can try out Windows Mail on his current system and see if he's OK with it. If so, then there isn't any issue to going with a new PC with an OS that isn't being EOL'd, instead of putting money into a dinosaur. If he doesn't like Windows Mail, as someone else pointed out there are other alternatives and a bit of googling should produce plenty of opinions from folks in a similar position.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 30 Mar 2014 23:12:16 -0400, "Mayayana"

machine that supports virtualization and put on a virtual XP - so he can still use his favourite programs like outlook express.
Or buy an off-lease computer with WinXP Pro that is only less than 5 years old with DDR3 ram and SATA hard drive instead of his ancient ide HD and DDR2 ram.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/30/2014 10:15 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Bingo. A lot of electronics retailers and electronics recycling companies sell refurbished second-hand pcs dirt cheap. These are usually off-lease business models. A guy I know recently replaced his ancient XP box with a refurbed IBM-era Lenovo running Win 7 Pro from Microcenter. A big improvement over what he'd had, for only $130.00.
Speaking of which, searching the inventory of retailers such as Microcenter will still find new pcs running Win 7. In fact, a quick check of Microcenter's website just turned up more than two dozen Win 7 desktop models. So if you really don't want to wrestle with Win 8 (and I can't blame you), you can still choose new and get an OS that doesn't require completely relearning how to use the pc.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Grow into a brand new machine. Keep present one working and set up. Data and pics and stuff can be transferred in some fashion. Get advice as you go along.
I have vrious computers and different operating systems. I got W98, W2K, XP, W7, Vista. I am not getting rid of a computer or system just to upgrade, anytime soon. I have no reason to stop using XP.
A new computer is only comparable with whatever it specifies.
Greg
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/30/2014 11:23 PM, gregz wrote:

computer is 12 years old, while still usable, things start to get slow. As time goes on and computers get more and more powerful, software developers use up all these nice new resources leaving us with the older PCs waiting longer and longer. I just recently replaced a 4 year old PC with a new one, faster and better. Normally, I would not do this for a PC that was only 4 years old, however, I came into this motherboard because it was not compatible with another application ... mostly specific hardware incompatibilities. My wife would still be using W95 and complaining all the way, how slow it it, if I didn't upgrade periodically. We probably won't be seeing W8 anytime soon. BTW, I haven't heard a word yet on this new computer, but I know the day will come, even if it's 5 years away. This all said, with the OP's 12 year old machine, the 1st thing I would try is a clean new install of the OS and a new HD if it is required. Of course, if you need a new HD, it's probably PATA and depending on the OS, it might be too large for the OS to deal with, in which case you would need to partition it into several smaller drive. And, the stuff you need, must be backed up. The nice thing about a totally new PC, is that you can still use the old PC to bring everything to the new one, either by network or thumb drive.
--
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What's the operating system ?
Greg
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
-- | Sometimes the smart thing to do in the OP's case is to get a win7 | machine that supports virtualization and put on a virtual XP - so he | can still use his favourite programs like outlook express. |
He probably has OEM XP. Putting it on a Win7 box would require buying a new OEM CD, for probably about $100 if he could find it. There's no reason he can't keep the old machine running. And it doesn't sound like he's the sort of person to be setting up VMs. :)
| Or buy an off-lease computer with WinXP Pro that is only less than 5 | years old with DDR3 ram and SATA hard drive instead of his ancient | ide HD and DDR2 ram.
Even in 2002 the machine he has would have probably had about a 1 Ghz CPU and maybe 500 MB RAM. That's more than enough for most uses. Nothing is faster than instant, no matter how new it is. *A lot* of money is wasted on loads of RAM that never gets used. If he wants to do a lot of editing of 30 MB images then he probably needs a new box. For most other things, the cheapest PCs have been more than adequate for many years now. (That's a nice aspect of XP. Microsoft went to great lengths to build bloat into Vista/7 so that their hardware partners could sell more stock. Win8 needs 1 GB RAM just to sit there. But XP is zippy on old hardware, and does just fine with 256 MB RAM for most uses.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, March 30, 2014 11:30:48 PM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:

Ridiculous. I recently retired a secondary 1 Ghz XP machine with 1 GB of RAM and it's performance was pathetic compared to any current basic PC. It's pathetic compared to the 3 year old PC I'm using as my main PC.
Nothing is faster than

More nonsense.
If he wants

And the current cheap one blows away that 12 year old 1 ghz system, running XP, which MSFT is discontinuing support for.
(That's

Irrelevant because PCs have had a lot more memory than that for a decade+.

It's also being EOL'd by MSFT. Why would anyone who wants more speed invest more money in a 12 year old PC, running XP, with a dying disk?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/30/2014 10:30 PM, Mayayana wrote:

Bullshit.
Maybe if you only load XP and then never do a thing on it. Otherwise, that is turtle time.
You want decent performance, you need more RAM.
The biggest mistake people make is to view a computer as if it is a major appliance. Sure, ovens and fridges don't change much over time, so they'll still perform their basic functions just fine even when newer models are on the market. But computers are dynamic devices. The software and peripherals that run on/with them are constantly changing. They gradually lose efficiency, and eventually lose compatibility. At some point, they won't be good for much anymore. Bite the bullet and upgrade.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 30 Mar 2014 23:30:48 -0400, "Mayayana"

The new or off-lease computer would come with the OS installed, and installing virtual XP is litterally a "piece of cake".

years in August). 256 is inadequate to run anything of consequence on XP. 512 will work, but 1024 really wakes it up, particularly if running 2 programs at a time. Takes all the load off the hard drive (swap file/virtual ram issues). With 256 ram, you WILL wear out the hard drive.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, March 31, 2014 7:54:04 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

You could do that, but I wouldn't be so sure it's a piece of cake. XP is being EOL's by MSFT right now. No more support, no more updates for security fixes, nada. Also, I wouldn't assume that XP has all the necessary drivers, with bug fixes, etc for any new PC that he's about to buy. For example if he buys an HP with a particular vidoe card in it, how can you be sure that driver is certified to work with XP? And if you buy a new HP, screw it up, and can't get XP installed, then what? And the point to installing an old OS is what exactly? He can't just use Windows Mail or switch to an alternate?
Then add in the fact that IDK what browser he's using, but if it's Windows Explorer, the newer versions of that no longer run on XP, so he's very likely to run into big problems there, trying to access web content for example, that won't run on an old unsupported browser.
In short, just buy a new PC and use it out of the box.

And the 6GB or whatever that you get with a basic PC today, combined with a multi-core 3 ghz CPU will work even better. Even a $100 Android cell phone has 2GB of memory today.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
trader_4 wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Wonder what kinda stuffs you have been working for 25 years? When I started out I was working on vacuum tube and transistor driven systems. Today's apps size is often bigger than 256, LOL! One example, look at the Photo shop Pro..... Wonder what people do with computers these days. Just doing word processing? emailing? that's it?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| > Even in 2002 the machine he has would have probably | > had about a 1 Ghz CPU and maybe 500 MB RAM. That's | > more than enough for most uses. | | Ridiculous. I recently retired a secondary 1 Ghz XP machine | with 1 GB of RAM and it's performance was pathetic compared | to any current basic PC. It's pathetic compared to the 3 year | old PC I'm using as my main PC. |
There is a caveat: It won't be fast if you don't run it clean. XP starts out with dozens of unnecessary services running by default. Then installed software often loads at boot without asking. If you run anti-virus you're adding a huge load with doubtful benefit. When you install hardware it will often load unnecessary startup programs. All of that can drag down any system. On numerous occasions I've had friends ask for help because their computer is running in slow motion. It's not XP that's the problem. And it's not old hardware. Once the software "barnacles" are cleaned off those machines run fine.
| > | > But XP is zippy on old hardware, and does just fine with 256 | > MB RAM for most uses.) | | It's also being EOL'd by MSFT. Why would anyone who wants | more speed invest more money in a 12 year old PC, running XP, | with a dying disk?
The OP may not want to. I was trying to describe his options. If he really wants to stay with what he's using his best option is to replace the hard disk. If he's happy moving to Win8 then he can do that for as little as $300. It's up to him. To my mind, replacing the hard disk is certainly a viable option. It's the part most likely to wear out.
XP EOL could certainly be an issue. If you just want to buy a box and have it work then it makes the most sense to simply buy new PCs when the old one seems inadequate. But if you don't mind spending some time, there's no reason they can't be maintained. And XP EOL really means very little. I run XP with SP3 but don't -- and wouldn't -- ever allow AutoUpdate to run, installing a constant drip-feed of barely tested changes... But that gets into security issues, which is a whole other kettle of fish.
I recently built myself a new box. I have XP on it. I built it with cheap parts from TigerDirect. I always buy older models of motherboard and CPU because the technology far outstripped the need years ago. I see no sense paying hundreds for the latest CPU when a model for $65 is still incredibly fast. I put 4 GB RAM into my new box, but only because that was the cheapest option. Win32 can only use a bit over 3 GB, and 2 GB would have been more adequate.
I do some photo editing, some web design work, and I write Windows software. (I make most of my income as a carpenter/contractor, but also have a sideline writing shareware, freeware utilities and components for use with scripting.) I've got a dual CPU, super-duper Dell in the other room that was given to me. It has Win7 on it. I don't like Win7. I prefer XP. Win7 is a bloated, spyware mess to my mind. It's salvageable, but barely. Win8 is worse. I use the Win7 box for testing software. Both the Win7 dual CPU box and my new XP box, with "mediocre" AMD A6 2-core, respond instantly. I keep them clean. If you find you need a high-power machine for speed to do things less intensive than video editing then you probably have a lot of crap weighing down the system... And you've probably been reading too many mainstream media articles written by tech journalists who depend on hardware and software companies for ad dollars. The world of tech survives on a dizzying pace of forced obsolescence, so if you go by what the media tells you you'll end up replacing gadgets as fast as you buy them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, March 31, 2014 9:45:51 AM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:

Never had that problem here. Standard XP load was fine, for it's day. Today, not so much for a lot of reasons, including that it's EOL'd and new software won't run on it.
Then installed software

Sure, anti-virus isn't needed. More bad advice assuming it's going to be used like a typical PC.
When

A 1 ghz, 500mb XP system that is 12 years old is a joke today. My $100 cell phone has a dual core 1.6ghz cpu and 2GB of RAM.

Your option didn't address his need for more performance. You said a 12 year old 1ghz XP machine is just fine for most people today. It's not.
If he really wants to stay with what he's

He didn't say he wanted to stay with what he had.
If

Makes no sense to me when he's talking about wanting more performance, more memory, etc. And the PC he has is 12 years old.

Sure put it in a museum.
And XP EOL

It means no more security fixes, if any issues are found. It means the last IDK how many versions of Windows Explorer won't run on it, nor will an increasing amount of new software. It means that if you buy a new system now, there is a chance that the drivers for the hardware won't be there. Unless you think manufacturers of new video cards, new video chips, etc are testing, certifying them, issuing fixes, etc for an OS that is EOL.
I run XP with SP3 but don't -- and

Gee, there's a clue. So, why are you talking about 500MB?
Win32 can only use a bit over 3 GB, and 2 GB

Feel free to pull out some chips.

Unbelievable.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You are opinionated to the point of arrogance...people have their own valid remarks to make! Yours' isn't the be-all, end-all last word on anything!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, March 31, 2014 11:53:20 AM UTC-4, Bob_Villa wrote:

I never said it was. You claimed that all HP's come loaded with crapware. I have two of them, all I said was that it's not true because mine only came with Norton and some HP utilities, none of which are intrusive. None of which are popping up ads, or anything like that. And I said that I'm very happy with my HP's.
YOU then replied with:
"Most people have brand loyalty not matter how irrational it may be...you may drive a Chrysler branded vehicle that is majority owned by Fiat. Dell,HP/Compaq,Acer/Gateway,Lenovo, all sell entry level PC's...and they all come with a certain amount of "crapware" (or limited use programs) that subsidizes the lowest price!"
So, who exactly is it that's arrongant and only think their answer is the be-all, end-all? You're saying that I have brand loyalty on an irrational basis. Besides that, I say you're full of crap. Because I have the HP's and I don't believe you do. And now it's shifted from HP's have crapware to just "entry level" PCs do. I think you're full of crap, but even if it's true, it doesn't make all HP's unacceptable and if you bought a cheap one that's subsidized with adware from whoever, who's fault is that?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/31/2014 11:53 AM, Bob_Villa wrote:

--
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| The new or off-lease computer would come with the OS installed, and | installing virtual XP is litterally a "piece of cake".
You mean Virtual XP mode for Win7? I thought you meant installing a VM. I don't know anything about Virtual XP mode, but it seems to require Win7 Pro, which costs quite a bit more than Win7 Home OEM. Maybe that's worth it to someone who can't give up XP but *has to* buy a new machine.
| I've been in the PC business now for 25 years (well, will be 25 | years in August). 256 is inadequate to run anything of consequence on | XP. 512 will work, but 1024 really wakes it up, particularly if | running 2 programs at a time. Takes all the load off the hard drive | (swap file/virtual ram issues). With 256 ram, you WILL wear out the | hard drive. |
How is it that so many people in a home repair group suddenly turn out to build computers for a living? :)
I wouldn't prefer to install 256 MB RAM, of course, and there is an issue these days with bloated software, but 256 MB RAM can work OK on a clean machine where people are doing typical things like Web browsing, email Office docs, etc. If you're worried about wearing out your hard disk then turn off the useless indexing service and either avoid AV or at least don't leave it at default settings, scanning everything you touch. There are lots of software causes of running the disk unnecessarily that have nothing to do with using the swap file.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, March 31, 2014 9:59:19 AM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:

Good grief. A MB today wouldn't even support installing the density chips you'd need to make 256MB.
If you're worried about wearing out your hard

Or just buy a basic new PC, which sounds like the solution to the OP's problem, which is a 12 year old PC with a failing disk and where he wants more performance. Why does it have to get so complicated?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.