Questions about XP

[winterlude]

I have a couple questions about XP.

I'm thinking about upgrading my current system, and then buying a new one in about 16 months. I don't like to shell out money every year for a new OS, so I'd want to stick to XP for a few years (still using 98 SE now).

One of my concerns is the feature that checks your hardware configs. Does it mean that each person must buy a different version of XP for each computer? I mean, I would not use my current computer once I buy the new one, but I'm worried that I won't be able to use XP on it since the new machine would have a completely different configuration.

I want to buy the Radeon AIW 8500DV when it comes out, but it is not supported by win 98 SE, hence the necessity for me to switch OS's.

So does MS allow people to move the OS to another computer by i.e. deactivating the previous one?

My other question is that I see the home addition advertised and an "upgrade." Does this mean I can't install it onto a newly formatted hard drive, as opposed to installing in onto a machine with an OS running? Since I am also upgrading my HD, I don't want to install win 98 just so that I can install XP as an upgrade.

Also, I've heard conflicting things about the speed "improvements." On either Anandtech or Tom's, I read that XP had a huge speed penalty for games. That's no surprise too since MS recommends a faster system to run the OS; however, Znet claims the OS is the same or faster than 2000, and much faster than 98 SE and ME. What gives? Are they talking about different software (ie fast for office apps, slow for games?) Actually, I don't care how fast my office apps run, because I can only type so fast anyway. But if the games run slower, then that's a big deal. If that's the case, then I'd just go with the RADEON VIVO 64meg instead (that one supports win 98, but doesn't have some of the features I want).


Thanks in advance.

 

[PlasticJesus]

My experience with XP is extremely limited. Bought it the other day just 'cause I wiped my Compaq laptop hardrive of it's OEM WinME OS and when I installed 98se there were no drivers available for most of the Compaq.

What I experienced was this: the XP OS queried my system searching for a qualifying upgradeable OS. It found the 98se so I was good to go. It then gave me an option that I understood to be something like I could either now totally replace the 98se with a full install of XP or I could just upgrade the 98se to XP. I couldn't get the total replacement business to work, so just went back and chose the "upgrade my 98se" option. I'm not a real smart guy, so it all seems that surely the end result is the same in any case.

I believe that the bottom-line-at-the-end-of-the-day is this: to use the upgrade, you're gonna' have to put the 98se on it first. I can put 98se on my laptop in about half an hour. If I take the 100 bucks I save by buying the upgrade and then multiply that by 30 minutes worth of work, maybe I can consider that I'm working for 200 bucks an hour. Just my thoughts. I know how it is that sometimes we think that it would be nice to have the original OS and not this upgrade business.

To take the XP off of one system and put it on another is certainly allowed under the EULA. I don't know if in that case you have to call 'em or something when their system sees what you are doing.

As for speed and what-not, I don't know the answer. I just put the OS on, got everything working, then packed the laptop up and put it back in the closet. I don't know why I bought it.

 

[winterlude]

Thanks PJ.

Do you remember how much space the install took up? Is XP on multiple cd's? Does it support/contain software RAID? Also I've heard that the largest partition it can see is 32 Gigs. Can anyone verify this? And how about memory addressability: I know that 32 bit can use up to 4 gigs of RAM, but I've also heard that some OS's like win 98 gives problems with more than 512megs. How about XP?

Thanks in Advance

 

[btvillarin]

When I installed XP Pro, it came to a little over 1GB. If you have a popular RAID controller, chances are it'll be supported.

Where'd you get the idea it only sees up to 32GB? I have a FAT32 60GB HD, and it sees that just fine.

Unlike Win9x/ME, there are no memory problems. It's based on NT/2K code, so it'll run fine as well.

I'm not sure about moving XP from one computer (deactivating) to another. I've never heard of that instance before. But, there is a file you can copy and save, in case you have to install it on another computer. You can read about that here:
Never Re-Activate After Installation

 

[PlasticJesus]

My upgrade is on one disc. I can tell you that there are 473 megs of whatever on the disc. How that translates, I don't know. I put Office97 on the system also, so I guess maybe I can't take the size of the hard drive and subtract what's still available and give you an answer.

Everything else you ask is stuff that I just don't know anything about. 32 gig partitions; RAID; memory concerns? I don't know.

I put the XP on the laptop and put it away. My daughter's ten and I reckon she'll find a use for it in a few years.

I don't even try to keep up with such things anymore. The XP purchase is very unusual for me. It's funny how I just got tired of this whole computer hardware thing.

My desktop is a Slot 1 p3 933 on a BE-6 II with 384 megs of Kingmax PC-150 and a V5 5500. This with 98se. I run the processor at 700 megs 'cause my V5 doesn't like it any higher. This is gonna' have to last me many years 'cause I've just mostly lost interest.

All this to essentially once again say that when you start talking about such things as RAID, I'm clueless. Sorry I couldn't help.

 

[Psychoholic]

<< One of my concerns is the feature that checks your hardware configs. Does it mean that each person must buy a different version of XP for each computer? I mean, I would not use my current computer once I buy the new one, but I'm worried that I won't be able to use XP on it since the new machine would have a completely different configuration. >>


Activation. It would be an issue depending on how long after you installed it on the first machine. If you have problems reactivating it on the new machine a call to Microsoft will fix the problem.



<< So does MS allow people to move the OS to another computer by i.e. deactivating the previous one? >>


Yes it's legal to change the copy to the new computer, as long as you only have it installed on one computer.



<< My other question is that I see the home addition advertised and an "upgrade." Does this mean I can't install it onto a newly formatted hard drive, as opposed to installing in onto a machine with an OS running? Since I am also upgrading my HD, I don't want to install win 98 just so that I can install XP as an upgrade. >>


The upgrade is the same as a Full copy, it just needs verification of a previous qualifying OS. If the previous OS is not installed on the hard drive it will ask for the installation CD as verification. As long as you have that you are fine. So, no, you don't have to install Win98 first.



<< Also, I've heard conflicting things about the speed "improvements." On either Anandtech or Tom's, I read that XP had a huge speed penalty for games. That's no surprise too since MS recommends a faster system to run the OS; however, Znet claims the OS is the same or faster than 2000, and much faster than 98 SE and ME. What gives? Are they talking about different software (ie fast for office apps, slow for games?) Actually, I don't care how fast my office apps run, because I can only type so fast anyway. But if the games run slower, then that's a big deal. If that's the case, then I'd just go with the RADEON VIVO 64meg instead (that one supports win 98, but doesn't have some of the features I want). >>


That is going to vary from person to person and experiance to experiance. There are a lot of factors in performance, and there's no clear cut answer. However if you are running with plenty of RAM, current drivers and a processor of 550mhz or above you should be satisfied with the results IMO.



<< Does it support/contain software RAID? >>


Only Professional does. To perform software RAID you need dynamic disks, XP Home doesn't support this.

Here's the differences between XP Home and Professional, from Windows 2000 Magazine.

• Backup?XP Pro has the standard Win2K backup program; XP Home has no backup program.
• Dynamic Disks?XP Pro supports dynamic disks; XP Home doesn't.
• IIS?XP Pro includes IIS; XP Home doesn't.
• Encrypted File System (EFS)?EFS debuted in Win2K and lets you encrypt files on an NTFS partition, a very useful feature for mobile machines. XP Pro includes EFS; XP Home doesn't.
• Multiple Monitors?XP Pro supports up to nine monitors; XP Home supports only one monitor (Windows Me/Win98 supported multiple monitors).
• Multiprocessor?XP Pro supports up to two processors; XP Home supports only one (as did Windows Me/Win98).
• Remote Assistance?Both editions support Remote Assistance, which lets someone from a Help desk connect to the client desktop to troubleshoot problems.
• Remote Desktop?XP Pro adds to Remote Assistance by letting any machine running a Terminal Services client run one Terminal Services session against an XP Pro machine.
• Domain Membership?XP Pro systems can be domain members; XP Home systems can't, but they can access domain resources.
• Group Policy?XP Pro supports group policies; XP Home doesn't.
• IntelliMirror?XP Pro supports IntelliMirror, which includes Microsoft Remote Installation Services (RIS), software deployment, and user setting management; XP Home doesn't support IntelliMirror.
• Upgrade from Windows Me/Win98?Both XP Pro and XP Home support this upgrade.
• Upgrade from Win2K/NT?Only XP Pro supports this upgrade.
• 64-bit Support?Only XP Pro will have a 64-bit version that supports the Itanium systems.
• Network Support?XP Pro includes support for Network Monitor, SNMP, IP Security (IPSec), and the Client Services for NetWare (CSNW); XP Home doesn't.
  
  
  
  
  << Also I've heard that the largest partition it can see is 32 Gigs. >>
  
  
  Wrong. Your hardware will limit you before XP will. If formatting as NTFS 4kb clusters would be a wise choice.
  
  
  
  << I know that 32 bit can use up to 4 gigs of RAM, but I've also heard that some OS's like win 98 gives problems with more than 512megs. How about XP? >>
  
  
  Win98 can handle more than 512MB of RAM you just need to tweak the cache. XP will use anything you give it and as far as addressibility goes, once again, you'll reach your hardware's limits first.

 

[winterlude]

Thanks for the info...

It seems like XP Home in some instances is a step backwards from MS's previous OS's.

Now I'm wondering, does XP Home Edition have any advantages over Pro (other than price?) such as more driver support or multimedia/hardware?

 

[Psychoholic]

<< It seems like XP Home in some instances is a step backwards from MS's previous OS's. >>


From what??? Windows 2000 Professional, yes, but for everything else it's a step up. None of the items on that list were supported by Win9x anyway.



<< Now I'm wondering, does XP Home Edition have any advantages over Pro (other than price?) >>


No.

 

[Sparty]

<< << It seems like XP Home in some instances is a step backwards from MS's previous OS's. >> >>




<< From what??? Windows 2000 Professional, yes, but for everything else it's a step up. None of the items on that list were supported by Win9x anyway. >>


XP Home doesn't do Multi-Monitor, 98 did. I beleive there are other things also, don't just look at what XP-H does that 98 didn't.

 

[Psychoholic]

<< XP Home doesn't do Multi-Monitor, 98 did. >>


Expand Your Workspace with Multiple Monitors and Dualview