• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

win2k and laptop

M

mikieboy

Senior member
two questions is win2k smaller than win98 and can it be ran on an old 133mhz laptop. i run 98 on the laptop now. if it is smaller than i think i would switch since i use it at home and love it
 
Win2K is larger than Win98, and consumes far more resources. A mobile Pentium 133 will be struggling to run it, especially if you have less than 64MB of RAM.
 
i agree. running win2k on a 133 DESKTOP system is painful enough, i wouldn't want to see it on a 133 LAPTOP. 98 does a pretty decent job though, so you should be happy enough with that.
 
P133 with 64MB of RAM is Microsoft's minimum configuration. It would be no fun running Win2k on that. Plus Win2k uses almost twice as much disk space as Win98.

I run Win2k on a P166 laptop w/104MB RAM and a 6GB disk. When I first set it up I only had 64MB of RAM and it was pretty slow. It's a lot better with more memory.
 
I've just installed it on an IBM 560 laptop

p133, 40 mb ram, 2 gb hard drive.

works very, very nicely. fully supported it 🙂

One of the smoothest upgrades I've ever done (from Win 95)
 


<< I've just installed it on an IBM 560 laptop >>

That can't be much fun - Win2k with only 40MB of RAM on a P133? That's like running Win98 on a 25MHz 486SX with 8MB. Not even, because that 486 meets minimum Win98 requirements, whereas your TP560 does not meet the mins for Win2K.

But if you say it's OK, you must have the patience of a saint. I do believe the upgrade went smoothly and everything is supported, though.
 
Another thing to consider is whether you can obtain drivers for all the components like sound and modem. for some of the old stuff, the manufacturers may not have bothered to go W2K compliant.
 
Workin' I honestly haven't used it too much to say if it's slow or not, but it does seem responsive enough at the moment. I don't expect to do 'heavy duty' work on it, only email, html coding, and C++/Java compiling with Borland/JDK (small simple programs for my Uni courses).

As you probably can guess, I'm the one who asked about mounting DOS disks for Linux. I'm dual booting it with W2k. I haven't tried your suggestions yet but thank you for the help regardless 🙂


KerbCrawler that's a good point. Alternatively you could run the W2k compatibitly program which will tell you if your hardware/software is compatible with Windows 2000.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top