XP Pro on 450 Pentium III

[biaya]

Hi
Our office are currently running (generally) Compaq 450 Pentium III. We are all running Windows 2000 and were considering upgrading to XP Pro. Once again, the engineers we use are telling us that these would be too slow to be operable. Can anybody confirm if this is the case?

Thanks,
Caroline

 

[Scotsdude]

How much memory in the machines? if you've got at least 128Mb, then XP Pro will run, probably quite happily. I used to run XP on an AMD K6-2 500Mhz with 128Mb of RAM and it was OK. You may have to turn off some features to get it to run well, but it should be ok. Scotsdude
Help us help you - let us know when our insane scribblings help!!

 

[biaya]

Hi
Thanks for the quick response. Yes, we are running 128mb Ram. Maybe we shoudl consider upgrading to 256 if we upgrade to XP?
Thanks for your help.

Caroline

 

[Tezzie]

Why upgrade when 2k and XP are almost identical?

Its also not just the hardware you have to consider when upgrading to XP - its software. Not all apps will run on XP so you may have the addedd expense of having to buy upgrades.

As an example, Sage accounting ran well on 2k, but they had a new PC with XP. It cost them £300 for the Sage upgrade to be fully compatible with XP.

Personally I don't see that its worth changing unless you know of a specific bell of whistle in XP that you can't live without.


Finally, I was running a PIII 750 when I upgraded to XP from 98. Because XP can be demanding on the system I eventually upgraded to P4 2.53 which makes it reasonable.

Although you can use XP on an old computer, you will find that productivity may fall.

Tez

 

[Scotsdude]

Tez has a fair point. You should only upgrade if you really need to. As for software compatibility, you can download a Compatibility Checker from Microsoft which well tell you which software programs may well be incompatible. It would also be worth checking with the software companies whose products you use if the current versions you have are Xp-ready.

To be honest, the best description I've heard of Xp was
"Its Win 2K with a Sesame Street interface...."

It has a couple of things to make it stand out over and above 2K, but nothing major. I use it at work and at home, but I'be just as comfortable & happy using 2K.

Scotsdude
Help us help you - let us know when our insane scribblings help!!

 

[Mattb7]

I personally would much preferr xp over 2000. Although 2000 is a good os, xp is better. I would definatley encourage an upgrade to 256mb of ram if that is possible because it would make xp much happier. Also what size hard drives do you have? XP takes a lot of space especially during an install.

 

[debonairOne]

Biaya,
To answer your question, XP does run on a PIII-450Mhz pc... I use it at home and work on a Compaq PIII-450Mhz EP Series unit. I have 384Mb and XP runs great. I did have an issue when I upgraded Lotus Notes and Office XP and run these apps simultaneously with about 4 other applications, but then what else shoud I expect. I would consider replacing your machines this quarter though. In an office environment, processing power can make the difference in meeting deadlines. For home, I am happy... Tell your engineers that unless they have run it in the proposed environment that they are only guessing at the outcome...
If the decision is to upgrade hardware within the first half of the year is made, then I wouldn't waste the effort upgrading to XP now... just purchase the units with XP already installed, or have the corporate techs install it. debonairOne

"I look in the mirror and what do I see..."

 

[c0i0nes]

We have just upgraded 23 machines 300MHz Celeron and above to XP Pro SP1, each with a minimum of 256Mb memory, and Office XP.
Over two months we have had no issues with speed, stability or useability. I would recommend the upgrade, unless there are compatibility isuues with hardware or software you need to use. The only problems have been with users getting used to a more rigid way of working, since policies have been tightened up and enforced.

 

[Peping]

biaya,

W2K with latest service pack and updates, your PCs will be just fine.

Peping

 

[CitrixEngineer]

Another vote for sticking with Win2k - there's nothing in XP that would make me recommend it, unless you did not already have an Operating System. Except, perhaps, the significantly reduced boot time (30 secs compared to 90 secs ave.).

Windows 2000 is NT 5.0, and XP is NT 5.2. Service Pack 3 for W2k gives the same security levels and many of the features that SP1 gives XP, so no advantages here.

...and you don't have to buy more RAM, although Win2k will be faster with more.

HTH CitrixEngineer@yahoo.co.uk

 

[JonJontheMighty]

Why not DUEL BOOT and get the best of both operating systems

 

[34534534534555]

I am running XPPro on a 300 Mhz P2 (whilst my other machine is being fixed) with 256Mb RAM, it runs really well.

Go for it. XP is a great OS __________________________________
Create like a God, Command like a King, Work like a slave..

 

[GSTERMAN]

as far as software compatablity goes why not just install the older software using XP's compatabilty mode?

I've done this with a few softwares it works & you'll save a mint too!


to do this right click on the setup file icon then go to properties then to the compatability tab then choose which os you'd like to make the software believe its running under 95, 98, NT, 2000 Etc.

 

[biaya]

Thanks everyone for your recommendations. It was interesting to read the conflicts of opinions. Having researched the compatability issues, we've decided to hold off on the upgrade to WXP for now. We are running Winfax 10.0 and would need to upgrade this, but more worryingly is the fact that Argent telephony do not support XP for their Office hardware. Apparently, they've brought out a whole new lot of hardware for XP.
Thanks again, your replies are always appreciated.
Caroline