On Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:05:48 -0600, Tony Hwang
wrote:

wrote:
On Sun, 30 Mar 2014 23:30:48 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote:



-- | 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.

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

| 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.)

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.

Huh?
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?
Don't know what you are getting at or what your problem is.
I just said 256 is inadequate - 512 is bare minimum, and 1024 wakes it
up. Where's your beef??? I also said using too little ram and
multitasking is hard on the hard drive due to page filing (virtual
ram).. That is true. What's your beef?

I started working for a computer manufacturer locally 25 years ago,
when the XT was hot stuff - the PC with 2 single side 5 1/4" floppies
was standard - with 16K of ram being a "full load"
We were the largest distributor of hard drives in Canada at the time,
and went on to be, fo a short time, the largest distributor of CD Rom
equipment in Canada - and I put CD Roms on networks across Canada back
before CD Rom was supported by the operating systems or networks
(novell, Banyan Vines, SCO, etc)

After 5 years in that position I went off on my own - been 20 years
now servicing small/medium business computers and networks.

Most (small/medium) businesses today could get along just fine with XP
Pro and 1 or 2 gb of Ram with 340gb hard drives, with a Windows 2003
server with a terrabyte or two.

My major clients are being forced into Windows 7 as their old systems
die off - not because they need the capability (other than not being
able to run more than IE8 - and the application not being Firfox or
Chrome friendly)