What I meant by resource intensive was less memory is required. Win2K will
run fine if you only have 128M Try that with XP SP2. It can keep an old
machine alive for a bit (no pun intended) longer.
73 Ross K9COX
----- Original Message -----
From: "i2phd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 7:53 AM
Subject: [soft_radio] Re: Winrad Problem On Win 98
> --- In [email protected], "Ross Stenberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Dan, if you can get Win2K it is much less resource intensive than XP
> > on an older machine.
> >
> > 73 Ross K9COX
>
> Well,
>
> I have both XP Pro and Win2K on the same PC, with a triple boot (add
> Linux) managed by Boot Magic, and I would say that perhaps I find XP
> snappier than Win2k on the very same hardware... I haven't performed
> any measurements, just my impression... the fact that my PC has plenty
> of RAM and it is rather fast can play its role, though...
>
> 73 Alberto I2PHD
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
