Did MS lie to me about basic requirements to run XP?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Itz Just Me
  • Start date Start date
I

Itz Just Me

I just bought a brand new computer just over a week ago. Money was an
issue, so I ordered it with 128 MB RAM, the minimum MS "recommends."
I posted earlier about the slowness I experience, how it takes 15 secs
for the control panel icons to open up those features, equal amount of
time to populate other system lists. I also note that when I close a
screen, it doesn't shut down, but rolls down, repaints to the next
screen. (Someone told me that is a sign of insufficient memory.) I
can't believe how crappy this computer runs. It's a Dell, Intel
Pentium 4 processor, XP Pro.

I haven't had so many crashes and freeze-ups since I used WinME three
years ago!

I've had failures like transferring some digital images from my camera
to a zip drive...everything looking normal, until I go looking for the
images only to find they do not exist on in the target location. And
unfortunately, since I never had this problem before, I deleted the
images as I was downloading them.

PaintShopPro (yes, a memory hog) takes so long to open. And freezes
up if I even think about it.

I use my computer for basic 'office' type uses, Word, Excel, Access,
and a little photo editing in PSP. I do not run more than one program
at a time.

What was MS thinking when they said such a computer could run XP with
128MB? Perhaps...if all you want to do is run Notepad!

Dell crammed all sorts of software on it, programs I don't want and
will never use. In fact, programs that probably conflict, like Real
Player and MS Messenger. Someone here told me that Real takes over a
system. I don't like Real, and deleted that right away.

Now I'm having all sorts of problems with my Iomega zip. It says the
disk I inserted needs to be formatted, when I've been using it to
store data all along!

Word, Excel, and Access work fine.

I followed the suggestions I got here and visited a Black Viper site
and turned off many of the XP services, setting it to the recommended
'safe' mode as prescribed at that site.

Hopefully, UPS will come to my rescue today, when they deliver the
strip of 512MB I ordered last week.

What I'd really like to know, and the reason I posted this, is...can a
system REALLY run XP with 128MB RAM? If not so, this is the second
time MS has lied to me...the first being when they 'told me' that
Windows ME was an operating system. ;)
 
Yes. Low memory just increases the boot up time but once booted it works fine. Your problem (at least in part) is that you have all the pretty features turned on that chew memory and CPU.

Type
change Windows visual effects
in Help.

Even with plenty of memory, things that can be done instantly are done slowly so you can see them being done. Minimun means minimun
 
In
Itz Just Me said:
I just bought a brand new computer just over a week ago. Money was an
issue, so I ordered it with 128 MB RAM, the minimum MS "recommends."
I posted earlier about the slowness I experience, how it takes 15 secs
for the control panel icons to open up those features, equal amount of
time to populate other system lists. I also note that when I close a
screen, it doesn't shut down, but rolls down, repaints to the next
screen. (Someone told me that is a sign of insufficient memory.) I
can't believe how crappy this computer runs. It's a Dell, Intel
Pentium 4 processor, XP Pro.
Click to expand...


As you've been told, 128MB may be sufficent to run Windows XP,
but it's not sufficent to run it well.
 
you should have spent the $50US to get an additional 128M.
Click to expand...


No, acutally I spent $80 and got 512MB from Crucial Technology, and it
will arrive today.

As for all the fancy things I have running, said the responder in the
message before this one (I do apologize for not writing down your
name), what fancy things might that be? About the fanciest thing I
have is a desktop image. I've turned off all the accessories I can
identify, and, as I explained in my earlier post, turned off all the
unnecessary XP services as outlined on the Black Viper website. I
don't use any form of IM, either, if that's an issue. My tray has a
firewall and an AV program running. So...
 
I gave you a thing to type in help which will show how to turn off all the slow things. All the eye candy
 
I must have missed something, David. All I saw from your original
message was a political web site that didn't seem to be about reducing
the 'eye candy' on XP. I didn't scour the page, though. I'll look
again.
 
Greetings --

To turn off _all_ of WinXP's GUI eye-candy:

1) Right-click the Task Bar > Properties > Start Menu, ensure
"Classic Start menu" is selected.

2) Right-click an empty spot on the Desktop > Properties > Themes >
select "Windows Classic."

3) Right-click My Computer > Properties > Performance > Settings >
Visual Effects, ensure "Adjust for best performance" is selected.


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH
 
Thanks, Bruce. However, now...I don't need to do that. I just
snapped in my 512MB memory strip and this computer is really whipping
now. I think it knows where I'm going next, too. LOL. Wow, with
640MB RAM I think I'm fine now. I'm not much into the eye candy
anyway. I'm ore of a straight ahead sort of computer user. But I
will say, this much RAM makes a world of difference.
 
Back
Top