Is it ever worth it to reuse components from my old machine?

[StealthElephant]

I had the thing custom built a long time ago.

Computer1
Computer2

The case is ATX and I'm kinda fond of it, the existing 300 watt PSU is actually larger dimension wise than Antecs 430w Truepower, so that'll fit. The HDD is 7200rpm (not sure of buffer).

Is there any reason why I shouldn't reuse the HDD, floppy drive, optical drives, and case? I mean, none of the optical/floppy/HDD connectors have changed since 2000 have they?

My only though is that the HDD may be a really slow ATA version or something.

EPoX "EP-8KDA3J" nForce3-250Gb Chipset Motherboard for AMD Socket 754 CPU -RETAIL

Any reasons I would have trouble? I figure a AMD64 3400+, Epox mobo, new PSU, ram, 6800GT and I would be on my way. Just format the HDD and reuse everything else. Am I asking for trouble trying this?

 

[CheesePoofs]

I reuse everything I can, ie optical and floppy drives, hard drives, cases, ram, whatever I can reuse I do. That way you have more money to spend on the expensive components.

Edit: Make sure that your case can fit a normal IO bracket in the back. It looks like its using a solid piece of metal, so it might be a different size than an IO bracket would be.

 

[Trashman]

About the only thing i may consider, buying a new HD....over 5yrs old probably 20gb, maybe 40gb tops...use old drive for storage and buy new hard drive....thats what i would do....but otherwise, i can't see any reason not to use case and such.

 

[StealthElephant]

WD400BB - HDD

^That is the model HD I have, 2mb buffer. I've still got 15GB unused. I dunno, I don't need alot of HDD space, and if I ever did, I could just add another. Is the performance on the drive going to kill a new setup?

About the IO bracket, it's removable, I checked. it's 6.25" tall, and about 1.8" wide, is that standard size?

 

[GuitarDaddy]

If you reuse the hard drive as the only drive I would strongly suggest reformatting and installing the OS fresh. As previously posted it would be best to get a new faster drive for the boot drive and keep your old one as a storage drive.

 

[StealthElephant]

Yea I plan on formatting and reinstalling Win98SE. I heard changing mobos can give the HDD problems.

My only concern was if the 2mb cache or ATA speed would be hurting me. I think that it's ATA100, though I'm not sure if it is.

EDIT: Oh yea, does the OS have any effect on anything? Because if possible I'd like to keep running Windows 98 SE, I just can't stand XP at all. The office I work at "upgraded" all the machines from 98SE to XP and they all run soo much slower now.

 

[beatle]

For the most part, my server is made up of parts that are over 5 years old. Heck, the AWE64 is coming up on 8 years this summer!

Reuse what doesn't need upgrading. Floppies aren't getting any faster.

 

[leedog2007]

If you got windows xp try that first. You can always re-install windows 98SE if you can't take xp

 

[CraigRT]

I cant believe someone in this world actually wants to use the vial piece of garbage namely windows 98... dude you really have to get used to something better.

Even Win2K kicks 98 swiftly in the ass. I love Win2K, and haven't even been using XP a year. Win2K always treated me well.

with a machine that new, it will NOT run slow !

 

[leedog2007]

Yeah. Go for windows 2k if you can't take xp. 98 can't even run NTFS if i'm not mistaken

 

[StealthElephant]

Originally posted by: leedog2007
Yeah. Go for windows 2k if you can't take xp. 98 can't even run NTFS if i'm not mistaken

Does it matter? The fact that I have the 98SE disc looks better than paying 100$ for XP. If 98SE won't cause problems with installation/drivers etc then I'd rather keep it. Everything about XP just doesn't sit right with me.

 

[Dravic]

Originally posted by: StealthElephant

Originally posted by: leedog2007
Yeah. Go for windows 2k if you can't take xp. 98 can't even run NTFS if i'm not mistaken

Does it matter? The fact that I have the 98SE disc looks better than paying 100$ for XP. If 98SE won't cause problems with installation/drivers etc then I'd rather keep it. Everything about XP just doesn't sit right with me.

win98 is 7+ year old code, and microsoft seldom supports a codebase that long. as soon as longhorn is released you could start to find it very difficult to find win98 compatible software. try finding win95 compatable software now. there is a growing number of software titles now that require 2000/xp.

I would condsider the $100 a part of the upgrade cost and make the move. stability and functionality wise you are going to choke your new hardware with that OS.

In short order you'll find yourself doing more with you PC since it can handle the demands of current/future software. win98 is only going to server as an anchor in the near future.

geez.. i build all my own PC's and apci resource management alone is worth $100 after an hour or 2 of finguring out which IRQ plays nice with which hardware, and then trying t o keep them that way.

I personally use win2k pro, so there is no need for me to go to xp. i'll probably upgrade to longhorn only if gaming still isnt viable on linux yet.

 

[DanDaMan315]

hint hint (get a copy of Windows 2k from a friend, theres no activation)

 

[leedog2007]

Good call dandaman

 

[StealthElephant]

Hehe, aight I got the point, I'll look for W2k or get XP if I have to.

Any word on the I/O backpanel? My existing case has a 6.25"x1.8" removable I/O panel. Is that a standard size hole? Will the I/O from the Epox board I linked above fit?

 

[batmanuel]

Also keep in mind that Windows 98 tends to choke on a lot of RAM. If you go over 512MB you could potentially have issues.

Plus software for Win 98 is going to be slowly disappearing. Doom 3 won't run on anything older than Win 2k, and I expect that it'll be the same for all future games based off that engine. The same is true of Office 2003.

On an A64 system with at least 512MB of RAM XP run like greased lightning. If you need it to be faster, you can always turn off the eye candy and visual themes so it pretty much looks and feels like 98/2000. Plus if you are running XP SP2 with an A64 or a 600 series P4, you get an additional layer of virus protection in the hardware.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Dravic
geez.. i build all my own PC's and apci resource management alone is worth $100 after an hour or 2 of finguring out which IRQ plays nice with which hardware, and then trying t o keep them that way.

I personally use win2k pro, so there is no need for me to go to xp. i'll probably upgrade to longhorn only if gaming still isnt viable on linux yet.

Ironically, Win98se actually has better PnP hardware resource-management support than W2K does, and it also does support ACPI. (Possibly better than W2K does as well.)

The problem is that current hardware mfgs aren't really supporting Win9x as much as they have been in the past, since MS essentially dropped support for it. They can't even get WHQL approval for drivers any more. (Not that that ever made much of a difference in driver quality, but it's the thought that counts, I guess.)

But in terms of overall stability and "smoothness" of multi-tasking, W2K/XP have it all over any version of Win9x. Even with the threat of things like Sasser and Code Red, I would stick with W2K at the very least. There shouldn't be very much different in terms of games support, for those games that are written for Windows/DirectX, although W2K/XP don't support DOS games well at all. If you want to keep playing DOS games, then dual-boot between Win98se and W2K/XP.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: DanDaMan315
hint hint (get a copy of Windows 2k from a friend, theres no activation)

It's people like you that caused MS to add that damn annoying "activation" feature to XP. :thumbsdown:

Besides, W2K Pro should be semi-cheap to purchase these days anyway, with everyone else moving to XP and beyond. Also, for those that don't know, MS usually also allows "downgrade rights" for their OSes. So if you purchase an XP license, you can "downgrade" for free to a prior OS that is normally supported for an upgrade install to XP. (So for example, W2K or Win98se.) MS will charge a nominal fee for installation media in that case, but it allows you to continue to run an older OS, legally, even if you can't find it for sale anywhere anymore. This may not continue, though, as MS pursues their "software as a service" and yearly license "subscription" models, rather than outright license purchases.

If nothing else, and you don't want to spend money on a new NT-based OS because you're not sure that it will be compatible with everything that you have, then MS usually has "trial" versions of their OSes available to download and install, and they are timebombed, and "expire" after 180 or 360 days. I had a trial copy of Server 2003 installed for a while, alongside my Win98se, W2K SP2, and XP SP1 installations. (Yes, major multi-boot setup. It's really easy to do, just install them in order.)

 

[NinjaGnome]

yeah go with 2k at least, it is basically just like 98 user interface wise but it has a much more stable core.