I have an “old” Dell (bought in 2000) running on Windows 98. I’m finding that this older OS is phasing out–newer software is incompatible with it. Upside: So are newer viruses.
Anywho…my machine has 128megs of ram, runs on a Pentium III processor, and has something like a 20gig hard drive. I don’t have a DVD-ROM drive, but a CD-ROM/CD-R.
Sooooo…would it be better to spend $200 and upgrade to XP, or shall I slap down $1000-$2000 and just get a new machine? My main concern is my machine being too old/slow/etc to handle XP.
BTW…I am a computer novice. I understand the basics, but just the basics. I should be able to back-up everything, unload everything, and upload XP, but who knows.
Computer technology advances at an incredible rate. If you have even $1400 to spare, you can get a really, really nice machine brand new. I’m not sure what OEM prices are looking like, but I recently built a new computer for $1000 in components and was blown away by the state-of-the-art hardware I was able to buy. Junk your PIII, I say.
There are lots of people here who know lots more about computers than I do (they’ll be checking in shortly). However, I have enough experience to recommend that instead of XP, you upgrade to Windows 2000 Professional. If you gotta use Windows, that’s the one. It’s the most stable OS they’ve made. My wife is using a 6-year-old Sony VAIO (PII, 266 MHz) that came with Win95. We upgraded it to 98 and 98SE, but it would crash all the time. About a month ago, I put 2000 on it, and she continues to marvel that it hasn’t crashed yet!
There are so many issues with XP that frustrate users no end, that I can’t see why anybody would voluntarily use it. Everyone I know personally who is stuck with it has had major problems with XP.
I work in the broadcasting industry, and the consensus of the station engineers around the world (who post to an engineering discussion list) is that if they have to buy new computers, to format the hard drive to get rid of XP and reinstall Win2K. That’s my two cents. If somebody actually has something good to say about XP, I’d be interested to hear it!
You might want a bit of additional RAM, but in general XP will run fine on a Pentium III. I used Win XP Pro on a PIII with 666 Mhz and 384 MB RAM for a long time. The computer originally came with Win98 SE, and the upgrade was definitely worth it, but OTOH I didn’t have to pay for it (and yes, it was completely legal)
However, as the others said, today it is a lot of money for a system that is a deadend anyway. Even a very low-end new system for a few hundred dollar offers significally more performance.
If you’re heavy into games, you should be aware that older, DOS-based games (such as Doom, Carmageddon, Myst, etc.) do not work under WinXP without some major tweaking. When I bought my new computer, I kept my old one and used a KVM switch to use the same keyboard, mouse & monitor for both.
I haven’t had any serious issues with WinXP so far. Of course, it’s been tweaked & optimized by many computer professionals with many of the useless overhead functions disabled, so YMMV.
1 GB of ram is not the current standard for RAM (for gamers maybe). 512 MB is the average for brand new systems although 1 GB certainly won’t hurt anything but that is not a point in this discussion. Windows XP runs pretty well on 256mb of ram and above.
Also, Windows XP home is only $99 instead of the $200 that you quote. It offers the same features as XP Professional without all of the fancy administrative stuff that corporations want for their IT department to administer control over the company’s computers.
What I would do is buy Winows XP home, and at least 128mb additional RAM. That will let you run XP just fine and cost you about $150 total.
New state-of-the-art computers are extremely overrrated for most things. With this system, you can make spreadsheets, Word documents, Powerpoint presentations, and e-mail, etc. as well as anyone. For $1300 more, you can, um, play Doom 3 at a higher framerate than the 13 year old down the street who’s system is 6 months old.
Until 1 month ago, my computer was a Pentium III 450 on 256mb of RAM. I thought it was much too old and rebuilt basically the whole thing with a new motherboard, an Athlon XP 2600+ processor, 512 mb of DDR RAM and a lot more. I have to say that while I am glad that I did it, the only real-world difference I see in performance is the ability to play two games that were really slow before.
Also, if you only know the basics, upgrading to Windows XP is much, much easier than switching to a new computer altogether. It is basically just loading a CD and everything will be left much like you left it. When you switch to a new computer, everything is nice and fresh but none of what you are familiar with is their. When I upgraded my computer, I spent literally, an entire day+ putting everything back the way I wanted it and there were still details that I forgot about.
Hmm. Good advice. Ignorant question: How does one upgrade/add RAM? That’s completely new to me.
The Dell is awesome and has been a very steady workhorse over the past 4 years. I also love the 19" monitor. I bought it new because the Compaq I had before was a useless piece of shit that needed a new harddrive in 8 months and now seems to have a dying motherboard. It was useless to me in less than two years; this one’s plugging alone fine after nearly five.
Oh…other relevant info. I don’t really play games. I like the occasional Roller Coaster Tycoon/Zoo Tycoon, but pretty much I use the computer for email, finances, spreadsheet/documents, researching the Net, and uploading/editing/printing images from my digital camera (I’m looking into getting a digital camcorder).
Also–the $200 I saw was the XP full version–“WINDOWS XP HM ED EN NA INTERNAL CD SP2”–seen here. I do see the $100 version upgrade–“WINDOWS XP HM ED EN NA INTERNAL UPG SP2”–just below it. What would be the difference? I’m guessing…$100 is to upgrade from a previous Windows OS vs. $200 for no previous OS? Or something?
I think the prices you’re quoting are too high. The Windows XP Home Edition upgrade version is only about $100, not $200. And yes, it’s for a system already running some Windows OS. But it will run slowly on such an old machine.
I recommend getting a new system. You don’t need to spend $1000-2000 on this. The least expensive new system from Dell is only $400.
A Windows upgrade version is the same as any other but it gives you a price break because you already have an older WIndows system. To upgrade RAM, you have to open the case and pop a new RAM module in an open slot. It takes less than five minutes if you know where everything is. You would have to find out what type of RAM your PC takes (e.g. PC 100) by looking at the manual in print or on line. Then you just order a new module online or buy one at a computer store. Newegg.com always has good prices and selections. Buy either 128mb or perferably a 256mb if they cost close to the same.
A Pentium 3 will run Windows XP just fine, though as others have said, you would want to upgrade the RAM; 256megs is the minimum amount needed for XP to run smoothly.
Upgrading the RAM is just about the easiest uprgrade to do. The hardest part is just finding out what type of RAM you need. Crucial Memory Configurator makes that easy though - just tell it what kind of computer you have, and it will tell you exactly what type of memory you need. Then all you have to do it turn the machine off, open the case, stick the RAM into an empty slot, close case, and turn the machine back on. Simple as pie.
2 votes for buying a new computer
4 votes for getting XP (but with the recommendation I upgrade RAM)
And 1 vote for getting Win 2000 and not XP.
Hmm. I’ll do some pricing. I looked at the Dell catalog tonight and realized if I bought a new system, I wouldn’t want the cheap model. Just like when I bought this machine, I’d want to get as advanced a system as I could so it would last as long as it could. And besides, flat screens are cool.
But since hubby’s Mac is older than my Dell, I s’pose he has first dibs on getting a new machine. I’ll start looking into upgrading my RAM and XP.
Well first of all, an XP upgrade from 98 only retails for around $100. But don’t do that, it’s dumb. Especially for such an old machine.
Second of all, buy a new computer. For $400-$500 you can probably buy a low-end Dell or HP computer boxed at Wal-Mart that is at least 3X as fast as yours is every-which-way they measure, has 512 megs of higher-speed RAM already, includes a new monitor, most likely includes a CD-burner drive and DVD-ROM drive (although both might be the same “CD” drive) and has WinXP already installed. It might even have a DVD-burning drive, I dunno how low the prices have dipped, but it’s possible. Shop around. …It is very unlikely you could do your own component shopping and get as low a total price for a comparable machine.
~
Another vote for a new PC, especially since you’ve mentioned your interest in a digital camcorder. That’s the kind of application where you’re likely to see a real performance difference with a faster processor, more and faster RAM, etc. Get LOTS of RAM! You can, of course, buy a new PC without a monitor, and keep using your beloved 19" CRT. CRT technology hasn’t really changed in years, so as long as it’s still working, there’s no reason to ditch it.
Well that ties the vote–4 for new PC, 4 for XP. I of course like the idea of a new computer. It’s all shiny and fancy and stuff.
I priced a machine at Dell.com–a $600 system that I upgraded to about $950 by adding speakers, a wireless keyboard and mouse, and a 17" flat screen monitor. Question–are flat screen monitors particularly useful and reliable? Or are they not really worth the extra cash?
Love mine, wouldn’t trade it for anything. Crisp display, no glare (since the surface isn’t glass), lightweight, and takes up way less real estate on the desktop (in fact, I ditched my old computer desk, and got one that’s about a foot shallower). One area where they fall down is if you try to use them at a resolution other than their native resolution. For example, the native resolution of mine is 1280 x 1024. If I set the resolution at anything else, like 1024 x 768 or (gasp!) 800 x 600, the display isn’t quite as sharp.
