🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <lv0l01dae4lilm6mvsv471bbg1oejrl3id@4ax.com>, William P.N. Smith wrote:
>dgrnyc@yahoo.com wrote:
>>I have a friend that has an old white box computer with a 133 MHz AMD
>>K6-2 CPU, 128 MB of RAM and a 20 GB hard drive.
>
>Kinda marginal, but it ought to work.  Depends on your definition of
>"acceptable", but it should be better than Win98...

Until recently I was using a system in another place that was pretty 
similar to the OP's, but it had an Intel processor (233 MHz IIRC) and 
a 3 GB HDD (which was usually pretty full :).

It was usable for the sort of stuff I do routinely, but was 
v..e...r...y   s..l....o......w to do a network logon, which was 
rather a PITA at times as it often took 10 or 12 minutes!

The "new" machine has a much faster processor, 512 MB RAM, and a 
"huge" 20 GB HDD.  (All that space! :)  But it's running XP Pro.

It logs on quickly (< 1 minute typically) but to my surprise it's 
actually v..e...r...y   s..l....o.......w copying files to a network 
drive and deleting files on the network.  *Much* slower than the old 
machine in fact.  So I put this down to some sort of housework that XP 
is doing that 2K Pro didn't bother itself with(?).

On balance, I prefer the fast logon and can tolerate the slow file 
management now that it's expected and I can plan around it.

Cheers, Phred.

-- 
ppnerkDELETE@THISyahoo.com.INVALID