Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
On 06/30/2015 08:48 AM, Jerome H. Fine wrote: I would appreciate some advice on both the software and the hardware life expectancy of a PC Windows System. While the hardware / software of the second and third system are almost 10 years old, I don't consider them, let alone the first system, topics for this list. But since my goal is to support running legacy software, especially including the RT-11 operating system for the PDP-11 computer, I request your indulgence. At present, I have three systems that I am running: (a) A 12 year old system that I am very pleased with that runs 32-bit Windows 98SE. I really only use it for e-mail under Netscape 7.2 and to run the DOS variant of Erstaz-11 in FULL SCREEN mode. It consists of a 0.75 GHz Pentium III with 768 MB of memory and 3 * 131 GB ATA 100 hard drives. The power supply has been replaced, but is still inadequate, so a separate PC power supply is used to run the hard drives which were also replaced about 5 years ago - the original hard drives were only 40 GB each. Note that while this system is a bit slow as compared to the next two systems (which are about 4 times faster), it really does everything I need to do. PLUS, the backups are a breeze since I use Ghost 7.0 to back up the C: hard drive in about 5 minutes every other day producing a single image file of about 1 GB. (b) A 7 year old system that my wife uses which runs 32-bit WinXP with 4 GB of memory and 2 * 500 GB SATA hard drives. The CPU is a 2.67 GHz E8400 with 2 cores and 6 MB of L2 cache, so it still runs reasonably well. My wife uses it for e-mail, watching youtube videos and google searches. The system has probably been used about 16 hours every day and turned off every night. The battery probably needs to be replaced since the boot each day needs to reset the date / time when the boot hangs at the very start, but otherwise the hardware seems OK. The software is very out of date and needs to be replaced. Note that if 7 years is not a really long time for a WinXP system (specifically the motherboard, video card and power supply) which has been used for between 20,000 and 30,000 hours, then I could upgrade this system to 64-bit Win7, double the memory to 8 GB and, if appropriate, also replace the disk drives and the power supply. The mother board, video card (which supports two monitors) and CPU would be retained. System (c) has the identical motherboard as system (b) and was considered a replacement. (c) A 7 year old system which runs 32-bit WinXP with 4 GB of memory and 3 * 1 TB SATA hard drives. The CPU is a 2.83 GHz Q9550 with 4 cores and 12 MB of L2 cache, so it runs reasonably well. The system was never used very much, probably a total of 200 to 500 hours and sat in its box for the past 4 or 5 years until I have finally been persuaded to upgrade to 64-bit Win7 and double the total RAM to 8 GB, the maximum the mother board supports. I just turned on the system yesterday and it runs correctly. My assumption at the moment is to upgrade to 64-bit Win7 and replace my wife's system. One aspect that puzzles me is that the video card, the same video card as in system (b), no longer supports two monitors (which it did and was correctly tested with 5 years ago). My first question is if a 7 years old system such a (c) would be likely to have any serious hardware problems after sitting idle for 4 to 5 years. I can't see that any current I7 CPU from Intel is likely to be much better, so why buy another system? The hardware has been used sufficiently, so infant mortality should finished. But, would a new I7 system be a sufficient improvement to justify spending the money? So I intend to replace (b) hardware and software with (c) hardware plus 4 GB of memory (for a total of 8 GB of memory) and switch to 64-bit Win7. Is this a good plan? Or is it likely that the motherboard and video card in system (b) is still sufficiently reliable after 7 years to upgrade system (b) to 64-bit Win7 and use system (c) for something else? My second question is just how thin is the ice that I am skating on for system (a)? If the answer is VERY, then I have one alternative to buying a new I7 system which would be used to run 64-bit Win7. On the other hand, if the motherboard in system (b) is not too old at 7 years and 30,000 hours, then system (c) would still be available. A lot of choices and things to consider. Jerome Fine I don't think this qualifies as answers persay, but more just data points really... I have successfully installed run Win7 x86 x64 on Dell Latitude D620, D630, D820 D830. Not sure on the age, but they gotta be getting on to around 7 years. The
Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
On 6/30/2015 5:48 AM, Jerome H. Fine wrote: At present, I have three systems that I am running: Dave had some excellent advice. However i had a friend who is a database developer (mentioned because he's not really interested in fooling with his OS, etc.) that wanted to upgrade an older system, such as the 10 year old one. XP, lots of MS and other development environment stuff accumulated. I suggested and he did an upgrade to the best system he could find which was Core I7, etc. lots of memory, nice display, and hopefully quality hardware. He used VMware converter to migrate his system to the new hardware, with all his stuff there intact. He was able to put the main tools he wanted on thru MS sources, as he had MSDN. he still has his other system running intact on the new system with vmware player. Shared drives and it running in the background makes it about 90% like he still has all his old stuff w/o major fuss of the upgrade. After a bit of fiddling got rid of the Win8 annoyances to a dull roar. I run all my systems on a Dell 2950 server. All of the systems will migrate with microsoft keys between dell hardware. The above scenario is a key thing to consider. I don't know about license migration to get the Converted systems reactivated. That is a complicated issue, but no insurmountable. I also had my accountant using the same scenario, and he migrated a large amount of Tax Prep hardware across with only a license re-activation session involved. He ran his old system however, not the new one. The use of virtual desktops is my mode of operation now. Main access system is a Mac retina display equipped macbook. With 4K displays now showing up, the resolution is pretty much unlimited as far as the remote desktops are concerned. thanks Jim
Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
From: Jerome H. Fine just how thin is the ice that I am skating on for system (a)? ... if the motherboard in system (b) is not too old at 7 years and 30,000 hours One data point for you: I have a whole flock of old HP desktops (actually, minitowers) from the late 90's (not sure of the exact date, but I _think_ they were released before Windows 98 came out) which I'm still running. (They've been upgraded with the PowerLeap iP3/T CPU insert with 1.4MHz Celerons, and Promise IDE controllers to run faster disks.) Although I laid in spare motherboards, CPU chips, etc so far the only problems I've had are that one of the iP3/T's died, and a mouse port died (easy to work around, using a USB mouse). Of course, these are HP machines, and relatively well engineered, so I can't extrapolate to other brands, but... Noel
Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
Finding this ironic thread considering we here keep machines waay past their freshness date going. Work with whatever and be prepared to migrate to another machine as needed. I never set in stone this is my xzy machine forever... see my point? Use whatever is the least hassle now, and will be the least hassle when it's time to move to another machine. In short I think your backup and recovery strategy is more important than the machine, when running old hardware that is not CPU nor RAM dependent. On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Fred Cisin ci...@xenosoft.com wrote: On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Dave Woyciesjes wrote: I don't think this qualifies as answers persay, but more just data points really... I have successfully installed run Win7 x86 x64 on Dell Latitude D620, D630, D820 D830. Not sure on the age, but they gotta be getting on to around 7 years. The RAM they have varies between 2GB 4GB. I have also installed Win8 x64 on a Latitude D830, then proceeded to swap that drive into a D620. Yesterday, I just upgraded a D820 from WIn7x64 to Win10 x64 preview; 3GB RAM, we'll see how that goes... In other words, you should not be using WinXP anymore unless you have an app that just won't work with Win7. Why not??!? Why do the experts advocate not using something that had been working? The fact that you CAN upgrade, doesn't seem to imply that you SHOULD. In that case, ditch the program or run in a VM. Why? If the hardware is becoming too unreliable, . . . If you need some sort of unavailable support, . . . Otherwise, WHY change?
Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
On 06/30/2015 11:05 AM, Fred Cisin wrote: On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Dave Woyciesjes wrote: I don't think this qualifies as answers persay, but more just data points really... I have successfully installed run Win7 x86 x64 on Dell Latitude D620, D630, D820 D830. Not sure on the age, but they gotta be getting on to around 7 years. The RAM they have varies between 2GB 4GB. I have also installed Win8 x64 on a Latitude D830, then proceeded to swap that drive into a D620. Yesterday, I just upgraded a D820 from WIn7x64 to Win10 x64 preview; 3GB RAM, we'll see how that goes... In other words, you should not be using WinXP anymore unless you have an app that just won't work with Win7. Why not??!? Fair question, easy answer. Security. Unless it's air-gapped, I wouldn't put anything sensitive on WinXP. Every month, we are finding out just how much WinXP is like swiss cheese. Why do the experts advocate not using something that had been working? Personally, I find Win7 runs about a fast as WinXP. Throw in compatibility with newer stuff (comes in handy when taking a break from the classics to deal with items from this decade, er, century The fact that you CAN upgrade, doesn't seem to imply that you SHOULD. Agreed. But RAM HDD upgrades will improve performance. In that case, ditch the program or run in a VM. Why? I'd run only that one application in the WinXP VM. Everything else I would do in the Win7/Linux/Unix/Mac host which is likely to be much more secure. And you get better portability. If the hardware is becoming too unreliable, . . . If you need some sort of unavailable support, . . . Otherwise, WHY change? It's subjective, personal opinion, really when it comes down to it. -- --- Dave Woyciesjes --- CompTIA A+ Certified IT Tech - http://certification.comptia.org/ --- HDI Certified Support Center Analyst - http://www.ThinkHDI.com/ Registered Linux user number 464583 Computers have lots of memory but no imagination. The problem with troubleshooting is that trouble shoots back. - from some guy on the internet.
RE: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
-Original Message- From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Fred Cisin Sent: 30 June 2015 16:06 To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Subject: Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Dave Woyciesjes wrote: I don't think this qualifies as answers persay, but more just data points really... I have successfully installed run Win7 x86 x64 on Dell Latitude D620, D630, D820 D830. Not sure on the age, but they gotta be getting on to around 7 years. The RAM they have varies between 2GB 4GB. I have also installed Win8 x64 on a Latitude D830, then proceeded to swap that drive into a D620. Yesterday, I just upgraded a D820 from WIn7x64 to Win10 x64 preview; 3GB RAM, we'll see how that goes... In other words, you should not be using WinXP anymore unless you have an app that just won't work with Win7. Why not??!? Why do the experts advocate not using something that had been working? Because the base OS and Applications no longer supports current internet standards ? The fact that you CAN upgrade, doesn't seem to imply that you SHOULD. In that case, ditch the program or run in a VM. Why? If the hardware is becoming too unreliable, . . . If you need some sort of unavailable support, . . . Otherwise, WHY change?
RE: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
Why not??!? Fair question, easy answer. Security. Unless it's air-gapped, I wouldn't put anything sensitive on WinXP. Every month, we are finding out just how much WinXP is like swiss cheese. Well there are other reasons. You buy a new printer and you find it only works on Windows/7 onwards. Microsoft does things to persuade you to upgrade... Lets take the latest Skype upgrade. Microsoft have blocked folks from using older versions of Skype, but the latest version has an un-documented requirement for the .NETv4 framework. So if you upgrade skype without it Skype fails to start missing dxva2.dll.. No the paranoid among you will say this is Microsoft trying to get you to upgrade to Windows/7... .. the seasoned developers will say I wonder if Microsoft has stopped testing on XP On the other hand you do find yourself jettisoning apps which do work, often ones supplied with Windows such as Hyperterm Why do the experts advocate not using something that had been working? Personally, I find Win7 runs about a fast as WinXP. Throw in compatibility with newer stuff (comes in handy when taking a break from the classics to deal with items from this decade, er, century The fact that you CAN upgrade, doesn't seem to imply that you SHOULD. Agreed. But RAM HDD upgrades will improve performance. In that case, ditch the program or run in a VM. Why? I'd run only that one application in the WinXP VM. Everything else I would do in the Win7/Linux/Unix/Mac host which is likely to be much more secure. And you get better portability. If the hardware is becoming too unreliable, . . . If you need some sort of unavailable support, . . . Otherwise, WHY change? It's subjective, personal opinion, really when it comes down to it. -- --- Dave Woyciesjes --- CompTIA A+ Certified IT Tech - http://certification.comptia.org/ --- HDI Certified Support Center Analyst - http://www.ThinkHDI.com/ Registered Linux user number 464583 Computers have lots of memory but no imagination. The problem with troubleshooting is that trouble shoots back. - from some guy on the internet.
RE: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
Why not??!? Why do the experts advocate not using something that had been working? (Windows XP) On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Dave G4UGM wrote: Because the base OS and Applications no longer supports current internet standards ? Oh, OK. I didn't realize that this machine wasn't connecting to the internet. What current internet standards am I missing out on?
Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
Why not??!? On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Dave Woyciesjes wrote: Fair question, easy answer. Security. Unless it's air-gapped, I wouldn't put anything sensitive on WinXP. Every month, we are finding out just how much WinXP is like swiss cheese. THAT is a good answer/reason! Why do the experts advocate not using something that had been working? Personally, I find Win7 runs about a fast as WinXP. Throw in compatibility with newer stuff (comes in handy when taking a break from the classics to deal with items from this decade, er, century Not finding much new/interesting/worthwhile in the new millenium Otherwise, WHY change? It's subjective, personal opinion, really when it comes down to it. Another good answer
RE: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Dave G4UGM wrote: .. its really great fun Only OS/2 is a little truculent Have you tried Parallels for hosting OS/2? It was developed originally for the Russian banking system to get their OS/2 based legacy software on to modern hardware. OS/2 worked flawlessly for me when I tried it several years back. YMMV with newer releases. --
Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
On 06/30/2015 02:43 PM, Fred Cisin wrote: Why not??!? On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Dave Woyciesjes wrote: Fair question, easy answer. Security. Unless it's air-gapped, I wouldn't put anything sensitive on WinXP. Every month, we are finding out just how much WinXP is like swiss cheese. THAT is a good answer/reason! Thanks! Worked hard on that one... ;) Why do the experts advocate not using something that had been working? Personally, I find Win7 runs about a fast as WinXP. Throw in compatibility with newer stuff (comes in handy when taking a break from the classics to deal with items from this decade, er, century Not finding much new/interesting/worthwhile in the new millenium Can't really argue that... Otherwise, WHY change? It's subjective, personal opinion, really when it comes down to it. Another good answer -- --- Dave Woyciesjes --- CompTIA A+ Certified IT Tech - http://certification.comptia.org/ --- HDI Certified Support Center Analyst - http://www.ThinkHDI.com/ Registered Linux user number 464583 Computers have lots of memory but no imagination. The problem with troubleshooting is that trouble shoots back. - from some guy on the internet.
Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System
I have Win3.1, Win98, and XP systems in separate boxes to support my classic computer interests. The latest is my Tek TDS320 oscilloscope, which I wanted to get a screen grab or actual data from. TEK had a piece of code Docuwave I think, which is 20 years old which talks to it via rs232 or gpib. However, it relied on drivers for NI ISA bus era GPIB boards. Good luck finding those drivers! Back to rs232. On 6/30/2015 1:17 PM, Dave G4UGM wrote: -Original Message- From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Antonio Carlini Sent: 30 June 2015 18:03 To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: Re: Advice Requested on Life Expectancy of a PC Windows System On 30/06/15 17:02, Dave G4UGM wrote: Well there are other reasons. You buy a new printer and you find it only works on Windows/7 onwards. Indeed. The latest stuff is (obviously) only tested against the current
