-
January 17th, 2007, 01:34 AM
#11
I think "Guest" might be a bit too harsh--you'll get more complaints of "it won't let me do X" than it's worth.
[HvC]Terr: L33T Technical Proficiency
-
January 18th, 2007, 06:05 AM
#12
Good ideas. I'll take those suggestions to heart.
I do not think any of them will be installing much software by themselves either to begin with as both have barely seen a PC in action.
-
January 18th, 2007, 09:05 AM
#13
Member
take the delete key off the keyboard they use
-
January 18th, 2007, 11:43 AM
#14
Well, I generally use WIN98SE.............but not on kit as modern as you describe
I would go Win 2000................. it is nice and stable and possibly cheaper than XP?
-
January 18th, 2007, 02:07 PM
#15
The first machine has been delivered, but since the box is surrounded by concrete, net access is spotty to say the least. I am currently teaching the user how to use a mouse and keyboard so there is quite a way to go before the user will be thinking about apps and speed
An ISP is coming over later to check things out and when the net connection is fixed, the real teaching will begin
-
January 18th, 2007, 02:35 PM
#16
Hah!
That is why I like Windows98SE............. you can harden it to suit yourself, and it does not open very much by default
I like Win2000 because it is stable and does the job with far less resource requirements than XP.
You do seem to be talking a stand alone scenario here?
-
January 18th, 2007, 04:13 PM
#17
Yeah, its for this machine I usually hand out the "crap" hardware to people who do not have computers but they usually know what to do with them too. This time, i got a few people that have no clue.
I ended up with Windows 2000 for that machine though in the end as XP really did not like the motherboard i think.
-
January 19th, 2007, 12:24 AM
#18
Junior Member
My opinion is XP
I had experiance i used xp alot on several types of machines
you need a 198mb min to run well
-
January 19th, 2007, 01:04 AM
#19
This is an XP box and is currently using about 520Mb of RAM.................I generally wouldn't like to put XP on anything less than 512Mb. My experience is that all Windows versions are more susceptible to available RAM amounts than processor speed.
Windows XP is rather like Win ME, it likes more RAM than NT4 or Win2000. They will work pretty well on 256 or 384Mb.
Another problem with XP is it sometimes won't play nice with old equipment and peripherals.
I know the minimum recommendation is 128MB and a 233MHz processor, but that does not give a particularly good experience, particularly if the user has had something like Win98SE on decent kit beforehand.
Windows XP is a very good operating system, so I don't like giving it to people on kit that does not show it as such
-
January 19th, 2007, 08:17 AM
#20
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|