Windows 2000 or 98SE for Pentium 100

[NokiaDude]

Should I install Windows 2000 or 98SE on a Pentium 100 with 64mb of PC-100 RAM?

 

[LiLithTecH]

Windows 3.11 would be a better choice. It would fly.

Win2k would not work.

Win98SE is the only logical choice.

 

[Budman]

I tried win2k on a p200 with 64 megs & it was painfull.but win98se works fairly good.

Stick with win98se.

 

[MisterMe]

I don't even think the Win2K setup will let you et past the first couple screens without telling you that you need a 133 or faster..

 

[NokiaDude]

Thanks! I've decided to put 98SE on this ancient beast. I'll hook it up to my LAN and run the NEO project until the customer pays for repairs (my friend, always comes to me for computer problems). Basically he deleted the C:/WINDOWS/ folder and he wanted me to fix it. He jammed two floppies into the floppy drive(plastic slide covers were stuck inside) and killed it, and then his case was covered in dust, there was about 2 inches on the bottom of the case! And then he ask if I cna put Diablo 2 on his computer, I say "NO WAY!, Buy a better computer built by Dell"

 

[JOSEPHLB]

Windows 98SE without the bloat. 98Lite would run nice on that

 

[ProviaFan]

I have seen Windows 2000 Pro run successfully on a P90 with ~48MB of RAM, so your machine could definitely run it. Don't expect the speed to be very amazing, of course. If speed is needed over reliability, try a bloatless Windows 98 install.

 

[NokiaDude]

Does Windows 2k have the system file protection built in? Because my friend thinks he need more disk space (he has 4 gb free) over CPU (P100) and goes deleteing C:/WINDOWS to "free up" space to install a P3 Req'd game. If Win2k has system file protection that would be great, like in WinXP.

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: NokiaDude
Does Windows 2k have the system file protection built in? Because my friend thinks he need more disk space (he has 4 gb free) over CPU (P100) and goes deleteing C:/WINDOWS to "free up" space to install a P3 Req'd game. If Win2k has system file protection that would be great, like in WinXP.

Yes, Win2k has SFP which should keep him from doing that.

 

[igiveup]

Of course, if we are talking disk space, 98 takes up less than 300MB and 2000 takes at least 650MB. I never thought I would recommend 98 over 2000 but do yourself a favor and install 98. It will respond better on that system if he is running games. Any other system, 2000 or XP.

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: jliechty

Originally posted by: NokiaDude
Does Windows 2k have the system file protection built in? Because my friend thinks he need more disk space (he has 4 gb free) over CPU (P100) and goes deleteing C:/WINDOWS to "free up" space to install a P3 Req'd game. If Win2k has system file protection that would be great, like in WinXP.

Yes, Win2k has SFP which should keep him from doing that.

Personally, I'd set him up with Windows NT Workstation. It's light-weight enough to run on a Pentium with 64MB of RAM, and also has enough user control and file security to keep your friend from destroying his computer.

If this guy is really as stupid as you make him out to be, I'd create a special user account just for him, and DON'T tell him what the administrator password is. With only user access, he won't be able to install most software to his computer, and you'll be able to set access on directories so he cannot delete them.

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob

Originally posted by: jliechty

Originally posted by: NokiaDude
Does Windows 2k have the system file protection built in? Because my friend thinks he need more disk space (he has 4 gb free) over CPU (P100) and goes deleteing C:/WINDOWS to "free up" space to install a P3 Req'd game. If Win2k has system file protection that would be great, like in WinXP.

Yes, Win2k has SFP which should keep him from doing that.

Personally, I'd set him up with Windows NT Workstation. It's light-weight enough to run on a Pentium with 64MB of RAM, and also has enough user control and file security to keep your friend from destroying his computer.

If this guy is really as stupid as you make him out to be, I'd create a special user account just for him, and DON'T tell him what the administrator password is. With only user access, he won't be able to install most software to his computer, and you'll be able to set access on directories so he cannot delete them.

Hear, hear. IF you can get WinNT4, it would be the best choice. Although it doesn't have SFP, you can set up permissions like Bob recommends to keep him out of trouble, and the memory and disk usage will be significantly lower.

I just didn't recommend WinNT4 in the first place primarily because I seem to have trouble finding it these days.

 

[ultimatebob]

Two more things to think about:

1) I know that giving your friend only user access is drastic and perhaps unpractical, but it's really the only way to make file security permissions work well. If his account has administrative access, he can easily take ownership of and delete a directory with only a few mouse clicks.

2) W2K's and XP's System File Protection is nice for fixing things like Internet Explorer, but it isn't good enough to save someone if they were dense enough to delete their entire system directory. No operating system is, for that matter. Hell, even a Mac (a computer designed for people like this) won't boot if you delete the system folder! Even if you use Windows 2000, you should back it up with some additional file security.

 

[NokiaDude]

Well this is what I did. I put a password on the BIOS, he likes to screw with that. Then I setup a Administrator account with a password, so I can fix his account if he screws up. Created an account for him and and hid the WINDOWS and Program Files Folder. That should keep him out of trouble for a while.

 

[Paulson]

hell I have a p200 w/32 megs of ram running win2k right now... it's really slow but hell, it works...

 

[Shide1]

At one time I ran windows 2000 on a p166 w/64mb of ram. It actually ran ok too.