Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: which OS is good

  1. #1
    Regular Member DAVE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    393

    which OS is good

    what's the best OS for the Laptop Dell latitude 233/128MB
    the winME or 98SE
    which one is better?

  2. #2
    SG Enthusiast The Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    CYQY
    Posts
    3,125
    Win ME was the worst OS Micro$oft ever made, IMHO. I vote for 98SE. An even better choice is Win 2k Pro.
    I don't know the same things you don't know.

  3. #3
    Junior Member zooner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    8,839
    on a 233... laptop no less?

    I've used win2k before and loved it, but I'd lean towards win98se with a machine like that.
    Strap It On Whenever It Seems Appropriate

    http://www.tomsclan.com

  4. #4
    SG Enthusiast twwabw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    LeRoy, NY, USA
    Posts
    2,472
    Win2000 for sure. Best OS for laptops. Superior power management, hibernate completely eliminates the problems with the old shutdown utilities. CS model possibly? Another stick of ram wouldn't hurt.... make sure you buy from a vendor like Crucial, with a config utility, as I believe you'll find this laptop takes 66mHz ram.
    Observe everything...focus on nothing..

  5. #5
    Foldin for Dad Zuma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Vancouver WA
    Posts
    601
    Because your laptop is a 233, stick to Win 98
    Steve
    Foldin with the Fat Dog machine!


    Long May You Run
    May God Bless You,
    "To the world you might be one person, but to one
    person you just might be the world"


  6. #6
    Senior Member Sid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen
    Posts
    5,174
    Win2000 for sure




  7. #7
    SG Enthusiast twwabw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    LeRoy, NY, USA
    Posts
    2,472
    Originally posted by Zuma
    Because your laptop is a 233, stick to Win 98
    Why?? Why tolerate the instability of 9.x, when you can put 2000 on the machine, and have it function fine? The fact that it is a 233 is no barrier. I've installed Win2K on at least 25 233-300 mHz PC's, in business environments, with no ill effects whatsoever. A couple are even running AutoCAD! The biggest bottleneck on this laptop will be its disk subsystem. Likely a very slow (3600 rpm??) HD. That's one of the reasons addt'l ram will help him a lot.

    As I stated before- 2K is the absolute best OS for laptops- period. And this one will run it fine.
    Observe everything...focus on nothing..

  8. #8
    Regular Member DAVE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    393
    win2K pro or just win2K
    anybody know how to install win2K in the laptop with no CD
    my Laptop have no CD so i just only can install through the LAN
    i have win2K but don't know how to install it
    can i copy the install CD to the driver then install from hard driver?

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,585
    Use windows 98... ME sucks period and win 2k would probably run better if you had more power.

    ииии



    ииии

  10. #10
    Elite Member Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    14,133
    Copy the folder named i386 to your HD and run the appropriate exe file in that folder.

    If you are upgrading, and or starting the install from within windows run winnt32.exe. (double click it)

    If you are installing from a boot floppy (even a 98 startup disk will do) run the winnt.exe file. If you use a win98 bootdisk, make sure you have smartdrv.exe on it, and run it (smartdrv.exe) before you run winnt.exe, or it will take all day (litterally)

    You'll have to maneuver to to c:\i386 in Dos to run winnt.exe
    Need help just ask.

  11. #11
    Foldin for Dad Zuma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Vancouver WA
    Posts
    601
    Scuse me Tww, it was my opinion, sorry if it offended you. I am not a laptop expert as you obviously are, still no reason to downgrade a person for their opinion
    Steve
    Foldin with the Fat Dog machine!


    Long May You Run
    May God Bless You,
    "To the world you might be one person, but to one
    person you just might be the world"


  12. #12
    Advanced Member jumpingrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles, Calif
    Posts
    894
    With that laptop... 98se hands down.

    Why? 2000 is superior but not on that laptop. 98se will run like it should with that hardware, 2000 will only be choked.
    Null

  13. #13
    Registered User UnitedWeStand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,198
    Where Is Stef..
    that laptop would run well with a Linux distro. forget micro$haft, ldisk the drive, install linux. gitty-up.

  14. #14
    SG Enthusiast twwabw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    LeRoy, NY, USA
    Posts
    2,472
    Originally posted by Zuma
    Scuse me Tww, it was my opinion, sorry if it offended you. I am not a laptop expert as you obviously are, still no reason to downgrade a person for their opinion
    Didn't mean to offend... wasn't downgrading you at all. Sorry if you took it that way. It's not what I intended.

    I was only trying to get the point across that Win2K is the correct choice for this laptop. That is after all, what the original poster asked. I make no claim to be an "expert" on them, but I speak from experience.... it's what I do for a living; I've done it before; I work on them all the time, and I've owned them myself.

    There is a misconception that Win2K needs lots of processor power to run. This just is not true. What it needs, (more than Win9.x) is memory. And, w/128 mb , it is borderline. That's why I suggested adding more, as have some others. 192 is a minimum in my experience to have the OS perform well. 128 will work for minimal apps, if you spend some time stopping unnecessary services. Remember, this is obviously not going to be a gaming rig. Not a P233, which a small (prob 2 or 4 gig) slow HD; and probably a 12" screen. But, with some more memory it will run Office and any mainstream business app. without too much hassle. And, it will do it with stability. 9.x just can't.

    2000 will do many things on this (or ANY) laptop, that 9.x couldn't do very well. If you've owned an older one, you've experienced some of these problems. I've owned 7 of them personally since about 94 or so (started w/a Com-Crap 486, running Win3.1), and the rest were all Dell's, starting with a Latitude LM- P166, 16mb Ram; 1gig HD, and Win 95. Then a 3100, 3500, CPx, 4000, and now an Inspiron 8000- soon to get a new Latitude C400. So that's why I feel qualified to speak about them. I installed 2K as soon as it came out (in beta as well) on the 3500, which was??? You guessed it- a PII-266. The CPx was a 350- worked great on that too.

    Power management is a BIG deal with laptops, and prior to 2K, mfg's had to rely on proprietory software to accomplish it. They used their own software to perform "suspend-to-disk" , to allow you to shut the thing down quicklyand statefully, without losing your work. You were lucky if it worked 50% of the time. 2000 provides that function flawlessly with Hibernate mode. This is what Hibernate mode was designed for- Laptops- NOT desktops. It serves no function at all on desktops, but is a god-send to the mobile user. Stateful shutdown, with complete retention of system state. It works great.

    Another BIG problem with laptops on 9.x is docking stations. If you ever owned a Toshiba, Dell, IBM, or Compaq with one running 9.x, then you know what I mean. Once again, proprietory software to deal with the issue of docking stations / port replicators. And, if they had a NIC pass through, you were really in trouble. Dell latitude's with C-Port replicators were notorious for this, as were the Toshiba's. They just wouldn't work dependably. Win2K deals with the different hardware profiles seamlessly, and trouble free. It also has no problems sensing and dealing with a different NIC when it sees it in the dock. 9.x would croak. Superior VPN support; MUCH better virtual memory management; and apps running in their own memory space. All these contribute to stability, and that's the ultimate goal. Yes- it sucks with games. Wanna' play games? You'll probably like 98 better.

    266 Pentium? No issue. 128mb ram? Not the end of the world, but could use at least 50% more. Would 98 run ok w/128mb? Yes, it would.... as long as you were willing to tolerate the other baggage that it brings to the party.

    So- sorry for the long winded rant, and sorry if I offended. Didn't mean to.
    Observe everything...focus on nothing..

  15. #15
    Advanced Member jumpingrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles, Calif
    Posts
    894
    Everything that you point out about 2000 is on the money, it's just a better system period. No one will argue that.

    I still would favor 98 on the premise that nothing additional would be done to the hardware. From this standpoint I would rather that my limited (by 2002 standards) rescources be freed up as much as possible for running apps.

    I guess that it really depends on what you want it to do (the laptop that is).

    That Linux idea is good too.
    Null

  16. #16
    Moderator YeOldeStonecat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Somewhere along the shoreline in New England
    Posts
    50,912
    I'd slap on Win2K....sure it won't be a ball of fire on a 233....but neither will any OS, it'll run fine, be stable, great OS for a laptop. Like TWW mentioned, the hardware on laptops is the primary bottleneck, so you really don't see any difference in OS's if you ever tried to compare them. The most brutal part will be installing the OS...."time wise"...as it will take longer than installing 9X, but once you're done, you're golden, and you'll be happy.

    I have a lot of clients using laptops for their businesses, and things just go so much easier when I upgraded them to 2K. Simply great for laptops, so many laptop issues I had to deal with with 9X went away! Everything TWWBA hit on, I have to back...so true.

    You already have adequate RAM, but I'd still try to stuff as much as your laptop will take (prolly 384 max).
    MORNING WOOD Lumber Company
    Guinness for Strength!!!

  17. #17
    Regular Member DAVE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    393
    128MB is full for my laptop
    i had nomore slot
    as you said win2K works better than win98
    and win2K have 2 version
    win2K and win2K pro
    what's the different between win2K and 2Kpro ?
    which one is better for my comp
    Dell latitude 233MHZ/6.4GB/128MB

  18. #18
    SG Enthusiast twwabw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    LeRoy, NY, USA
    Posts
    2,472
    The Windows 2000 desktop OS only comes in one flavor- Windows 2000 Pro.

    As far as ram goes... what exact model Latitude is it? Is it a CPi ? If so, it can take 256mb max. If it's just a CP- you're right; 128 is max.
    Observe everything...focus on nothing..

  19. #19
    Foldin for Dad Zuma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Vancouver WA
    Posts
    601
    An apology to twwabw, I took your post wrong and that was wrong of me. You made some great points on 2K and a laptop.

    Next time I will keep my mouth shut, sorry guy
    Steve
    Foldin with the Fat Dog machine!


    Long May You Run
    May God Bless You,
    "To the world you might be one person, but to one
    person you just might be the world"


  20. #20
    Regular Member DAVE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    393

    Linux or win2K

    i have experienced all the microsoft OS such as MS 95, 98, ME, 2k and XP but no experience with linux
    i read the review on the Cnet and they voted for red hat linux 7.1 is the best OS with 9 point
    http://www.cnet.com/software/1,11066...tml?tag=dir-os
    so red hat 7.1 and win2k which one is better for the Dell latitude Cp 233MHZ/128MB/6.4GB
    recently. i'm using the desktop which is running winXP pro to share the internet for my laptop
    the win2K will work well with internet sharing but i don't know will it work for red hat linux ?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •