How to install XP on a new PC?
- Thread starter wjw123
- Start date
Hyo
Quiz Detective
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2004
- Posts
- 88
But XP is a worse memory hog when compared to Windows 2000 Pro.
I know that both systems hate RAM because they don't know how to administrate it correctly (Trust me, after seeing Linux and Mac OS X run, you know that Windows is the worst OS ever).
But I guess it depends on the computer you are running. If you have 512+ RAM, install XP and you'll get the same performance you get out of Win2KPro only that with a better and customizable interface.
I know that both systems hate RAM because they don't know how to administrate it correctly (Trust me, after seeing Linux and Mac OS X run, you know that Windows is the worst OS ever).
But I guess it depends on the computer you are running. If you have 512+ RAM, install XP and you'll get the same performance you get out of Win2KPro only that with a better and customizable interface.
slerch666 said:
No, it isn't.
I prefer my 98se, XP tries to do everything for you, networking it with non XP machines is a NIGHTMARE, and it has never been that stable for me.
Also, I despise the interface - I know you can change it to "standard", but things still aren't in the same places.
It's like a dumbed down version of 2k - it treats you stupid and tries to do everything for you.
Hyo said:
You're right about it being a memory hog. I have 512mg Ram and 50% of it is in use most of the time.
I was a member of the Mac fan club until I was able to built my own PC. Cheaper PC and more software made me switch.
Microsoft just wants us to keep upgrading their OS and software to make $$$. That is the bottom line.
slerch666
updyke,
- Joined
- May 23, 2002
- Posts
- 8,984
If you prefer 98 to XP, that's your perogative. Do you have stability problems with W2K on your machine, since they use the same basic driver models?c.t.h said:
98SE was the best of the 9X OS builds, by far, but there is no way it is better than XP IMO. Pretty GUI built on DOS, or a 32 bit OS built with stability in mind, built from "scratch" (or built from W2K which was rebuilt NT4). It's all a matter of preference. With XP Pro I've never had problems networking systems together.
You will have to forgive MS for not wanting people to use NetBEUI, a rather instable protocol, with XP. That's probably a big problem people have with networking home PCs together, since TCP/IP requires an IP address to be assigned in order to see another system. It's not just a "plug and play" process like it can be in W2K and below using NetBEUI. Using a broadband router (a Linksys) and leaving DHCP on, I've NEVER had problems seeing the rest of the PCs in my home. Even when we were connected to a crappy hub and had IP addresses static I never had a problem with XP seeing the other machines.
Again, to each their own. And yes, MAC OS is stable, but not as user friendly when someone is an advanced PC user. It doesn't feel intuitive, though perhaps that's just my "up bringing."
c.t.h said:why would you want to, XP is trash.
I used to think so.... and I do still in some ways, BUT I love the integration it does... and how easy things are to manuever around.
Its not bad at all... just a little buggy still... but then again, I am sort-of hard on it. Constantly everyday I have at least 4-5 graphics programs open, 3 internet pages viewing my updates, at least 3 folders, my email, and my media player playing my Quake 2 CD features SONIC MAYHEM.... YEAH!
oh yeah.. sorry about that lol.
btw.. if you still need help, I'll help you out.
I am figuring since you just built this computer that you can boot off your CD-Rom. Some CD-Rom's do not support this feature... unfortunately.... although I believe all newer ones do.
Do you have an upgrade or a full version?
The install is pretty easy though.... and only takes me about 30 minutes to complete if that.
†B†V†
Last edited:
>>>>Do you have an upgrade or a full version?
The install is pretty easy though.... and only takes me about 30 minutes to complete if that.<<<<
I have the OEM version. I hope it don't make a difference.
Which CD drive did you use? I could not get my Plextor writers to do the xp install two years ago.
Actually I'm building a new PC for a friend of mine.
The install is pretty easy though.... and only takes me about 30 minutes to complete if that.<<<<
I have the OEM version. I hope it don't make a difference.
Which CD drive did you use? I could not get my Plextor writers to do the xp install two years ago.
Actually I'm building a new PC for a friend of mine.
slerch666
updyke,
- Joined
- May 23, 2002
- Posts
- 8,984
Doesn't matter what version you have as they are all bootable.wjw123 said:
Check your BIOS to see if it's set in the boot order to use the CD-ROM first. If it is, it could be that your CD-ROM is too old as some older drives were NOT bootable. I have yet to find a CD-ROM yet that doesn't install XP as if your machine has the power to support XP, more than likely the CD-ROM is new enough to boot from.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2001
- Posts
- 1,209
I concur, just so long as you have the full version CD and your BIOS is set to read that particular CD drive first then you're in good shape.
And in my opinion:
Win98 = SUCKS
Win98SE = Much better
Win2kPro = Excellent
XPHome = SUCKS
XPPro = Somewhere between 98SE and 2kPro, but it's pretty
And, of course, DOS = GOD lol
I'm anxious to try a good version of Linux though. I'm itching to get some certifications and I've been told Linux is the way to go.
And in my opinion:
Win98 = SUCKS
Win98SE = Much better
Win2kPro = Excellent
XPHome = SUCKS
XPPro = Somewhere between 98SE and 2kPro, but it's pretty
And, of course, DOS = GOD lol
I'm anxious to try a good version of Linux though. I'm itching to get some certifications and I've been told Linux is the way to go.