Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Windows ME


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 dbogart1500

dbogart1500

  • Members
  • 5 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:12:01 PM

Posted 06 September 2010 - 06:29 PM

Need to know if can I replace windows ME with XP in PCV-RX360DS desktop computer

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 MrBruce1959

MrBruce1959

    My cat Oreo


  • BC Advisor
  • 6,377 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norwich, Connecticut. in the USA
  • Local time:12:01 PM

Posted 07 September 2010 - 11:35 AM

There should not be any problems with your doing this.

For the savings I would suggest you purchase the Windows XP upgrade disk, it's cheaper than the full version and serves the same function.

If you choose to keep your present programs and settings this is a good option as well.

The only issue with doing a Windows ME FAT32 upgrade with Windows XP, is your version of XP will also be FAT32, not NTFS.

If you want Windows XP to be NTFS, you will have to do a clean install.

By the way, you can do a clean full install with an upgrade disk, so don't be fooled into buying the more expensive full installation disk of Windows XP.

Bruce.

Edited by MrBruce1959, 07 September 2010 - 11:37 AM.

Welcome to Bleeping Computer! :welcome:
New Members: Please click here for the Bleeping Computer Forum Board Rules
 
My Career Involves 37 Years as an Electronics Repair Technician, to Which I am Currently Retired From.

I Am Currently Using Windows 10 Home Edition.

As a Volunteer Staff Member of Bleeping Computer, the Help That I Proudly Provide Here To Our BC Forum Board Membership is Free of Charge. :wink:

#3 Sketch71

Sketch71

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:01 AM

Posted 07 September 2010 - 11:58 AM

I would how ever recommend upgrading the ram in the unit to at least 256mb . The base computer comes with is 128mb installed, while XP will run on 128, it will be pretty choppy.

Edited by Sketch71, 07 September 2010 - 12:00 PM.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey look, buddy, I'm an Engineer. That means I solve problems. Not problems like 'what is beauty?', because that would fall within the purview of your conundrums of philosophy. I solve practical problems.

#4 dbogart1500

dbogart1500
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:12:01 PM

Posted 08 September 2010 - 10:27 AM

I installed XP from CD I have but when I try to install AVG antivirus it tells me "virtual memory is low.Should I just upgarde RAM?

#5 strolln

strolln

  • Members
  • 400 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N. Calif.
  • Local time:08:01 AM

Posted 08 September 2010 - 10:47 AM

I believe your computer supports a max of 512M RAM and I would advise you to max out the memory for a better experience with XP. Go to crucial.com and use their scanner option to determine how much RAM you have and what it will take to max it out.

As shipped, that model has 2 memory slots with one filled with a 128M module. If your particular machine is like that you will need to purchase 2 256M RAM modules, pull the existing 128M module and install the 256M modules.
To Err is human; to really foul things up requires a Bleeping Computer!

#6 Sketch71

Sketch71

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:01 AM

Posted 08 September 2010 - 10:48 AM

you don't have to upgrade your RAM but if you are just running 128mb it wouldn't hurt. You can do this: Start >> Right Click My Computer >> Properties >> Advanced Tab >> Click the Change Button in the virtual memory Panel >> Adjust accordingly.

Edited by Sketch71, 08 September 2010 - 10:48 AM.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey look, buddy, I'm an Engineer. That means I solve problems. Not problems like 'what is beauty?', because that would fall within the purview of your conundrums of philosophy. I solve practical problems.

#7 Keithuk

Keithuk

  • Members
  • 957 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:01 PM

Posted 09 September 2010 - 04:21 PM

you don't have to upgrade your RAM but if you are just running 128mb it wouldn't hurt.

No but you could make a cup of coffee while certain apps load/run. Memory is quite cheap today and you will be surprised of the speed difference. Whats the point in spoiling the cake for a bit of icing? You just need a couple of 256MB PC133 chips, search ebay or the web. :thumbsup:

How to Upgrade Memory in a PCV RX360DS

Keith

Windows ME (spare computer)
Windows XP 2002 Professional SP3 (desktop computer)
Windows 7 Professional SP1 32bit (laptop computer)

Windows 8 64bit spare drive for laptop computer


#8 dbogart1500

dbogart1500
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:12:01 PM

Posted 26 September 2010 - 10:02 AM

Thank you all :thumbsup:

#9 Keithuk

Keithuk

  • Members
  • 957 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:01 PM

Posted 26 September 2010 - 03:17 PM

Thank you all :flowers:

Thank you for what?

It would be useful if we knew what you upgraded just in case someone else has a similar problem?

Have you tried WinXP yet? :thumbsup:

Keith

Windows ME (spare computer)
Windows XP 2002 Professional SP3 (desktop computer)
Windows 7 Professional SP1 32bit (laptop computer)

Windows 8 64bit spare drive for laptop computer


#10 Gabrial

Gabrial

  • Members
  • 468 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:01 AM

Posted 26 September 2010 - 05:20 PM

Windows XP can convert filesystems after installation from FAT32 to NTFS, though if you are using any REAL MODE DOS programs, you will not be able to boot to real mode dos to run them.

After you upgrade ME to XP, you can convert the filesystem to NTFS with the following command from the Command Prompt:

convert.exe c: /FS:NTFS /V

it will tell you it is unable to convert until your next reboot. Accept this proposition and reboot the machine. It will take awhile before you see the windows desktop again. Go get yourself a coke and relax.

#11 Platypus

Platypus

  • Moderator
  • 14,490 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Local time:02:01 AM

Posted 28 September 2010 - 08:45 AM

For most purposes, there's little to be gained from converting the file system to NTFS, especially if the original 40GB HDD is retained. If the system hasn't been prepped to align 4K boundaries (likely), the resulting NTFS volume can end up with 512 byte clusters, which hampers performance. And it's virtually certain to produce a fragmented MFT, also not optimal.

Top 5 things that never get done:

1.


#12 cryptodan

cryptodan

    Bleepin Madman


  • Members
  • 21,868 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Catonsville, Md
  • Local time:04:01 PM

Posted 28 September 2010 - 02:39 PM

For most purposes, there's little to be gained from converting the file system to NTFS, especially if the original 40GB HDD is retained. If the system hasn't been prepped to align 4K boundaries (likely), the resulting NTFS volume can end up with 512 byte clusters, which hampers performance. And it's virtually certain to produce a fragmented MFT, also not optimal.



FAT32 cannot deal with files larger then 4Gigs in size. So converting to NTFS has one huge advantage. Its why when windows 2000 and XP are installed on drives smaller then 8.4Gigs you get prompted to either format using Fat32 or NTFS. On drives larger then that you get only NTFS.

#13 Gabrial

Gabrial

  • Members
  • 468 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:01 AM

Posted 28 September 2010 - 05:22 PM

A full NTFS partition performs better when fragmented than a full FAT32 partition, due to the file table structure differences. Also, there a limitation inherant in the XP and 9x format programs which wont allow it to format a FAT32 partition greater than 32gb.

Microsoft support tells us the Limitations of the FAT32 File System in Windows XP, but what they don't tell you is that you can use a third party tool like the freeware tool Fat 32 Formatter from Ridgecrop Consultants Ltd. This tool can very quickly format FAT partitions up to 2 TB (terrabytes) in size. There's even a Win32 GUI Version too.

Reasons to have a FAT32 partition these days are usually Inter-OS compatibility related. Mac OS-X, most Linux distribtions, MSDos, etc. can all read and write fat32 partitions natively, while mounting NTFS partitions is usually touch and go and not or not fully supported if at all.

A removable drive moved between systems doesn't even have the potential to run into file owner/permission restrictions when formatted under FAT32, so it's easier for the average user to use. In fact, I've never seen a USB flash stick or external drive ever come formatted from the manufacturer with anything but FAT32 for these reasons.

So yeah, FAT32 has it's place.

#14 Platypus

Platypus

  • Moderator
  • 14,490 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Local time:02:01 AM

Posted 29 September 2010 - 12:27 AM

FAT32 cannot deal with files larger then 4Gigs in size. So converting to NTFS has one huge advantage. Its why when windows 2000 and XP are installed on drives smaller then 8.4Gigs you get prompted to either format using Fat32 or NTFS. On drives larger then that you get only NTFS.

Yes, storing files 4GB and larger is probably the biggest single advantage of NTFS for most people. I didn't consider that a compelling enough benefit to support dbogart adopting the suggestion of converting a presumably small system drive and probably coming back with a very slow system that they can't revert. I was only referring to that situation, not using NTFS in general.

At installation, XP enables creation of new FAT32 partitions up to 32GB, for creating larger partitions only NTFS is offered, the selection of this value triggered as FAT32 would use 32KB clusters on a >32GB partition. It's quite content to install onto pre-existing FAT32 partitions larger than 32GB.

Top 5 things that never get done:

1.


#15 Platypus

Platypus

  • Moderator
  • 14,490 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Local time:02:01 AM

Posted 29 September 2010 - 12:42 AM

A full NTFS partition performs better when fragmented than a full FAT32 partition, due to the file table structure differences. Also, there a limitation inherant in the XP and 9x format programs which wont allow it to format a FAT32 partition greater than 32gb.

True, a properly created NTFS partition has real performance advantages. One converted from FAT can have real problems. I had to deal with this for somebody only a few weeks ago.

XP has been deliberately engineered to not be able to create a FAT32 partition greater than 32GB at installation. 9x/ME doesn't have this restriction - in your link Microsoft advise of this:

"If you need to format a volume that is larger than 32 GB, use the NTFS file system to format it. Another option is to start from a Microsoft Windows 98 or Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition (Me) Startup disk and use the Format tool included on the disk."

Edited by Platypus, 29 September 2010 - 12:43 AM.

Top 5 things that never get done:

1.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users