🚀 go-pugleaf

kevin <kevin@Invalid.Address.Com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> SmakDaddy <archangel@engineer.com> wrote

>>>> Might see how viable 256K of ram is and install XP instead.

>>> depending on what its to be used for,you might get away with installing a 
>>> user friendly (well, friendly fora linux flavour)
>>> linux distrobutuon like mandriva or something.

>> Nar, the owner is a pretty naive user.

>>> you can pretty much guarantee there will be free-to-download
>>> hardware specific or compatible generic drivers for all the
>>> hardware on the laptop.

>> Its a desktop.

>>> also depends  on the purpous though. if its for internet, email,
>>> and word, then something like mandriva will do all that easily. if its to 
>>> run games and stuff, that xp option sounds a lot better...

>> Yeah, particularly for the camera etc, XP or SE is the way to go
>> IMO. Main advantage with XP over SE is that it will be easier for me to fix 
>> as required, mainly because of the install in place with XP. SE is a tad 
>> dinosaury in that area. Quite adequate for their use tho.

> Not sure about XP since you only have 256k RAM.

64 actually.

> Can the RAM be upgraded?

Likely, but there arent any XP drivers for it,
just 2K drivers so that might not be a great idea.

> Anyone know what the min RAM is for XP?

There isnt any real minimum, I have installed
it on a 64M system. Rather slow tho.

> Do you have a regular Win98 CD and upgrade CD to Win98se?

Yes, but chose not to use that.

> Or a Win98 CD Full Version (if they made one)?

98SE OEM, yes, that installs fine and is how I proved
that it was a stuffed SE install, that fixes the problem.
And its happy to use the Product Key thats on the
manual that came with the system too.

> If so dump the restore CD and repartition the Drive to one Partition.

It only had the one partition, I just formatted that and SE installs fine.

> Then install Win98(se) and or upgrade to Win98se.
> You should be all set from there.

Its more complicated than that. For some odd reason while there
are 5 video drivers on the compaq site for that system, not one of
them is for the intel video chipset that is actually present.

Looks rather like its one of Compaq's odditys that never did
get made in very big volume and its unclear if the recovery
CDs actually belong with that system at all. Compaq couldnt
find any data on the number thats on the CDs and their
database only shows a recovery CD for 2K for that system.

Looks rather like someone used a separate compaq oem SE
and the recovery CDs are from something else or something.

I worked out which chipset its got using Everest, Intel i752 and
an Intel 82810E graphics controller. Nothing on the intel site for
the i752. Decent collection of drivers for the 82810 but when you
try installing the one for 98 etc, it says its for the 810 etc video
chipsets. Its happy to install and does appear to work on that
system tho, at least allowing the better video modes to be set
now. They dont play games on that PC so it should be fine.

> I think the problem was you were looking at the wrong CD trying to run
> a Win98 CD (Restore CD) on a system that has been ugraded to Win98se.

Nope, its always had SE on it, the manual
and product key are for a compaq oem SE.

> It wanted to see the Win98se CD and not Win98 unless it asks for it.

The QReasy error message doesnt even mention that possibility, it
rabbits on about various possibilitys with the hardware its booted on.