Disabling ram with XP - how???

I think I recall that with w98 it was possible to run MSCONFIG and
disable some of the ram. How can I do this with XP?? I want to try
running XP with 128 mb ram to see how much slower it is.

 

You can't disable RAM with XP. The only way to do what you are describing is
to open your computer case and remove the RAM.

 

You know, generally, people like to make there computer faster.........

Just kidding, carry on!

 

One would think so, this question also had me scratching my head.

 

I've got a 400 Mhz computer with 768 Mb ram (or thereabouts). It runs XP
great. My daughter's laptop has a CPU of similar speed but only 128 mb
ram. It runs a heck of a lot slower and I think this is due to lack of
ram, but wanted to confirm with the experiment described in the OP.

 

Many here would have confirmed that to you easily.

 

Perhaps I should've phrased it differently - I want to find out if
reducing ram to 128 mb is alone enough to cause the degree of slowness
observed. I suspect that there is another factor causing the slowness in
my daughters laptop.

I was amazed recently to see that IBM are selling a thinkpad with XP and
only 128 mb ram.

Is there an official Microsoft minimum figure for ram with XP?

 

It could also be that since it's a laptop it has a slower RPM hard drive
(my viao has only a 4200 RPM drive), vs a desktop with a 5400, 7200,
10,000 or 15,000 RPM drive. Makes a huge difference in speed.

# Pentium 233 MHz or faster processor
# 128 MB RAM
# 1.5 GB hard disk space
# CD-ROM or DVD drive
# Sound card
# Keyboard and mouse
# DVD video playback requires DVD drive and DVD decoder card or DVD
decoder software and 8 MB video RAM # Video capture feature requires
appropriate digital or analog video capture device and 400 MHz or faster
processor for digital video camera capture # 33.6K modem and Internet
access required for online and conferencing features

 

yes I hadn't thought of that. I suppose the difference will be amplified
as well due to the laptop using more swap file than the desktop.

Thankyou.

Am I correct in believing that XP has more background services running
and so will run slower than W98 given the same hardware??

 

Depends. On marginal hardware (ie, the stuff above) 98 is faster. On
decent hardware, the NT based OSs are faster because they manage resources
better.

 

That's a total shame and dis-service to the public who are suppossed to
[should be able to] depend on big names like that to properly design a
system. The pc will be swapping even before it's done booting up to
windows. That system is a 100% bad setup with 128.

 

I have no time for laptops.

 

Of course you're correct. I'm starting to remember some things I got
pissed off at in the past regarding a similiar thing. I remember when
ZDnet was pretty popular, even among some techs for info. Back then MS
spent tons of money in ads there, big ads too.

So windows 98 comes out and you see this big ZDnet article titled
something like this:

"Windows 98 is much faster than windows 95 and will speed up your pc and
speed up your internet service".

That's what really killed ZDnets credibility. ie they'd say anything for
dollars.

 

Gateway is selling them the same way. Had a customer who just bought one of
the $499 desktop specials from Gateway. No floppy drive, and it only had
128MB, and some of that was used by the video. Lots of the big companies are
doing that with the real cheapie systems.

 

It's slightly true in a way, in the same sense that XP is faster than 98.
On adaquate hardware, it is faster. On 98 level hardware, XP is slower.

 

No need perhaps? I just got a Thinkpad T23 recently. Its a great machine
and 3X faster than my desktop. I've setup a wireless network which means
I can work on either machine - or both, can work away from my cluttered
computer table and using a mobile phone I can get intenet access when
away from home. It is also great for showing photos. I wouldn't like to
be without it now.

 

That particular model (R40E IIRC)is a lot cheaper than most thinkpads. I
guess it is an attempt to build down to a price and compete with other
cheap laptops.

 

I've owned a Sony Viao for a while now (FR130 with an XP2000 and GF4
graphics). It's kinda heavy though, being a desktop replacement kind of
laptop, so I just picked up a Compaq Armada 300 off ebay. It's smaller
than my work notebook (not notebook computer, just a notebook). Wireless
and wired all around, for both.

 

I guess you get what you pay for. What saddens me is that the average
Joe trusts the retailers, and then ends up with a slow as shit computer.
I'm thinking about the dad that is getting a pc/laptop for his
son/daugthter and then they are stuck with it. The dad tried to do his
best and well....

 

grin. I do like sitting next to someone when flying who has a dvd player
laptop and watching the newest movies. Last flight I sat next to
this "rapper" and his "crew" I just read in the paper he's in jail for
shooting somebody.