View Full Version : Windows 2000

03-14-2001, 02:07 PM
Hi Folks,
Great forum, I just love exercising my brain and expanding my very limited PC knowledge (yes I am an old fart).
I expect there is limited info to date but I am just looking for any comments re Windows 2000. I have recently (one week ago)loaded WIN2000 Professional on my wifes old P133 with a 1620meg HD and 32meg RAM.
FYI, The instal went without a single hitch, all her settings etc. remained as they were and the system is running perfectly. She has MS Office 2000 Proffesional loaded and only one or two other small programs (no internet access). It is slightly slower that it was with Win98se due to the additional 200meg size of Win2000 (free space is now only 600meg).
I am considering loading Win2000 on my P166, 2gig HD, 32megRam and would appreciate any comments as I am more concerned about screwing up this compueter as I use it for work. I also use Office2000 plus MS Project and have Bell Sympatico High Speed internet access. My free space is currently 950meg.
All comments appreciated.
Tanzie (The Old Fart)

03-14-2001, 10:10 PM
I am amazed 2000 runs on the system you list...I guess it is within the specs, but MS alwys gives specs that don't anticipate actually running programs, just the OS...

Since you had good luck with the 1st system, as long as you do a backup, you might as well try the other...although safe money says don't upgrade a system that works fine...

If all the parts are listed as 2000 compatible, you SHOULD be ok, but you're braver than me, I would never have tried it on a 133 w/32 RAM...

03-15-2001, 12:45 AM
Three suggestions: Get more RAM, get more RAM, get more RAM. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif Crucial.com supports The PC Guide, so please click on their ad on the homepage. Take a look at the "Library" tab on Crucial's homepage. They've got a couple of pages about Windows 2000.
Your hard drive must be getting tired out from all the page file swapping. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif

03-15-2001, 07:41 AM
mikew, you have my greatest respect!

Last night I installed Windows 2000 here for a test ride (on a spare HDD). My system is a 900MHz with 160mb RAM. Win2000 consumed 800+mb of disk space, takes 60mb RAM to load a desktop, and runs kind of sluggish.

Here's MY question:

Why is it called Windows 2000 PROFESSIONAL when I have to click 'My Network Places' and then 'Computers Near Me' to get to what any semi-skilled user would know as a LAN?

Windows 2000 is goofy bloatware, but I guess I'll have to live with it.

Please everyone, bow you heads and observe a minute's silence in memory of the greatest Windows version that ever was: NT4.

[sleddog.f2s.com] (http://www.sleddog.f2s.com)

03-15-2001, 10:22 AM
Thanks Kenja, that was a very interesting read in Crucial.com.
MS recommend P133, 64mb RAM & 2gb HD minimum. Obviously my wifes P133 is short on RAM but it's not really worth upgrading. It's fine for what she uses it for (primarily word processing and spread sheets). I don't know why Sleddog's system is sluggish, according to the report it should be significantly faster.
Talked to my ISP and they report no problems with any windows based programs when upgrading to WIN2000 only problems are with older DOS stuff.
By the way, I ran defrag after the WIN2000 instal and at least MS have eliminated the reconfigure and reboot in safe mode to prevent constant defrag restarts and hang up at 10%. You can run defrag from windows and the P133 defrag only took 30 minutes.
I think I will hold off on installing WIN2000 on my P166 until I've checked out RAM cost and increased to at least 64mb.
Tanzie (The Old Fart)

03-15-2001, 11:51 AM
If you have learned how to "Ghost" one hard drive to another.....I would consider getting a larger hard drive before you do the P-166....using the internet as much as you probably do with that kind of bandwidth, you are running the risk of running out of swap space on the 166 in a hurry.

"As hard as a rock & dumb as a brick"...Windows CEMeNT

03-15-2001, 05:29 PM
I wasn't happy with 64MB for Win2k Professional. Had a 200MHz Pentium Dell that was chipset limited to 64MB, and all the page file swapping (to an EIDE 5400rpm 4.3GB drive) annoyed me to the point of selling the machine.

Dell online support ran an upgrade analysis for my Dimension, and concluded there wouldn't be enough RAM for customer satisfaction. It also suggested the second generation Pentiums would be more appropriate. I've got four different Celeron machines that run Professional and Server just fine, but they all have at least 192MBytes.

[Note to sleddog:] It's called Windows 2000 because M$ Marketing thought they could get more money for it if they didn't name it "NT5 Semi-pro Workstation". http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif

03-16-2001, 11:07 AM
Hmm... My chipset is also limited to 64MB. Did some cost checking yesterday and adding memory and larger HD is starting to lead me towards staying with win98se for the moment and saving the bucks for a new P111 system instead. Win2000 has some nice features and I have'nt heard of any problems with it but it does'nt seem worth the cost of upgrading an old system for. Just adding the other 32MB of RAM will probably speed things up a bit for now.
(sleddog)... The use of words like (Computers Near)ME and MY (Network Connection)instead of LAN is much more personal for the girls in the office. I guess we know nothing about marketing eh !!!

03-16-2001, 12:15 PM
I have Win2000 at work (98SE at home) and have found a good Win2000 resource guide: http://www.labmice.net/
Check it out.

When in doubt... reboot!

03-17-2001, 08:33 AM
OK, so 'Computers near me', etc. is the personal approach for those who do not understand technical terms like 'LAN'. But why does MS expect such people to understand such technical terms as 'Internet'? Shouldn't 'Internet Explorer' be 'Computers far from me Explorer'? For that matter, does everyone fully understand the technical term 'computer'? I propose 'Digital devices for creating, storing and sharing information far from me Explorer'. And instead of 'Windows 2000 Professional' I suggest 'Windows 2000 Garrulous' http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif

On a more serious note, I've spent a fair bit of time over the past few days with Win2k. I said in a previous post in this thread that it was sluggish. This was unfair -- I had it installed on an old 2.2gb HDD: that disk is slow. I've since re-installed on a new 20gb Fujitsu and it's now very fast and snappy. All in all, I'm coming to like it very much. Almost as much (I'd wager) as do HDD and RAM manufacturers http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif

[sleddog.f2s.com] (http://www.sleddog.f2s.com)