Thinkpads Forum

Hi!

I have this T61 that i'm considering tossing, because i'm so upset and feel robbed paying top dollar for this "thinkpad"

So here is the planling, i would appriciate any input you guys might have.

** Option 1: Installing Windows 2000 SP4

-SATA drivers not included in the distro.

?Any way to slipstream the SATA drivers on a custom install CD

?Missing any essential drivers, i saw a reference on the lenovo site that w2k was supported at some point in the past, havent been able to find it since.

?Any other heads up?

**Option 2: Installing Windows 2003 Server and converting to Workstation

I really have no clue about this, anyone done it succesfully?
Any heads up would be appriciated?

Admin Message: Deleted a poll not adequately related to message.

Admin Warning: Do not remove admin or moderator messages!

(right, must have missed this part on the 'rules of the road' Didn't mean anything by it and left a notice there that what was done, was done. Sorry 'bout that..)

XP or Windows 2003 server is the way to go.

Anything specific wrong with w2k except the missing SATA support ?
I'd rather save the CPU cycles and not install XP, so if there is nothing wrong with w2k i'd rather go there??

--Zaph

I run w2k on both my T42's, and have XP SP2 on a spare hard drive in case is needed for the odd application.

Good luck on getting w2k to run on a T61, which is likely my next Thinkpad. For the T61, I'd be happy with XP SP2, as is very fast after some modifications - and much faster plus lighter on resources compared to Vista.

Zaph,

Hard to answer your question without knowing what you are having difficulty with.....and what your PC goals are.

Was your problem speed, BSODs, or....

But, it is easy enough to experiment with different o/s systems.

In fact, I am using XP Pro but installed Ubuntu Linux on my T61p last week and thought it was great (high speed, less affected by viruses, all the media programs, etc). If you end up needing a Windows MS program use VMWare via Linux. Ubuntu is pretty darn capable these days. By the way, you can download and burn an Ubuntu Live CD and actually boot it up to see if all your hardware is recognized BEFORE installing Ubuntu.

W2K can be very fast especially if you use the famous BlackViper recommendations on removing excess processes.

But, again.....need to know what problem you are having.

Zaph wrote:**Option 2: Installing Windows 2003 Server and converting to Workstation

I really have no clue about this, anyone done it succesfully?
Any heads up would be appriciated?

unless you have prior experience using or deploying server 2003, i wouldn't recommend it.   i've used 2003 since inception (over five years) and can tell you that it's not an "out-of-the-box" OS like XP.   features and services have to be optimized, turned on, or turned off to work properly and reliably on a notebook.   not all software will install on 2003 because it does not register with some installers as a compatible OS.   for example, the adobe design premium CS3 installer absolutely won't install on 2003 without tricking it using microsoft application verifier.   some software won't even install with that method.   on top of that, not all XP drivers are compatible with 2003 or the T61 -- most notably the atheros a/b/g driver.

don't get me wrong... i enjoy using 2003 and would still be using it today if it worked perfectly on my T61p.   ironically i wouldn't be using vista ultimate x64 (which is based off of server 2003 x64's base code, fyi) today had it not been for issues i had with 2003 on my T61p.   however, at this point i have no desire to go back to 2003; IIS7 is better, the core OS is more reliable, and i haven't had a single BSOD in over six months.   vista, for me, has been bombproof.

if you decide to go with 2003 then please understand what you might be getting into as it's definitely not for everyone and may not work well for you due to possible application compatibility and/or driver compatibility.

without knowing more about your understanding of these various OSes or your intended use, it's difficult to make a specific recommendation.   i've abstained from voting for now.

Hi, erik!

I have installed Windows 2003 Server R2 on some HP servers before, and therefore feel pretty confident i can do a succesful Server -> Workstation conversion. (turning on audio and video acceleration, tweaking IE, removing manage your server console, tweaking paging performance, removing unused services and so on and so forth)

Picture editing wise i'm still at Photoshop 7.0 because it boasts minimal bloat and i think the UI went all screwy in PS 8.

I thought that w2k drivers would actually be a better match for w2k3 rather than XP, because the w2k3 server retains the w2k API as a subset of it's own API.

As far as the atheros drivers go, this machine specifies a Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN, do you know if this is supported in w2k3 ? Lenovo site couldn't tell me and allso w2k3 is not listed in the supported OS's section.

Alacrityathome:

My goals are are purely speed, removing all eyecandy, usability, minimal bloat and memory footprints, as fast as possible framerates on Elder scrolls Oblivion, smooth Huge sized Cililization III maps running smooth as a baby's butt, maximal encoding speeds on DVD-> Xvid conversions, uninterrupted workflow, as in the computer doesent take personal moments for a couple of seconds in every couple of minutes, uptimes nearing months rather than days and security as tight as a vogons [censored].

Here's what i'm thinking:

*W2k pro, most familiar with, know good OS.

*W2k Advanced Server x64, would go here if i could find the distro and aquire a serial.

*W2k3 -> workstation conversion, will go here if w2k fails to run somehow

*XP, will have to be satisfied with this, allthough i swore never to cross the line over to the XP side of things, i hate the eyecandy that comes with it and seemes like a bloated up piece of bloat compared to the sleekness of w2k

*Vista, will never go there and will not fix anyone's computer if it runs vista, will resign if forced to install it.

My various problems are listed in another forum post here: http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=57747

I hope this clears things up!

As allways all input on the matter is aprriciated!

--Zaph

as i asked in your other thread, have you tried to perform a custom restore of your lenovo factory XP installation?   unless you absolutely need 4GB system memory (which it doesn't sound like you do), i can't imagine why you'd write off XP as an option so quickly.   you can turn off all of that "eye candy" and make it look exactly the same as 2003 or 2000.   XP SP3 is soon to be out so it keeps getting better all the time.

You are aware that Win2k SP4/RC1 actually has a larger footprint in memory than WinXP SP2/3 and that the security in XP is far better, yes? The WiFi support is also far improved. I put off upgrading to XP until SP2 came out, but after that, there was no reason to stick with 2k. I've also had more blue screens with new hardware and 2k than I have with XP, which has had NONE in years.

If I were you, I would try to aquire an XP Pro OEM CD and do a full, clean install. Not the R&R bloated lenovo BS. A clean XP install flies. You can try to download an ISO somewhere on the internet (NOTE: This is NOT illegal. He has a legit OEM Key)

as a side note, if you're looking for security and windows you really need to look into Vista... no other MS OS can hold a candle to Vista's network stack.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_sp1.asp
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/windowsxp_sp2.asp
http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/xp_sp3.asp

Zaph,
In my opinion, I see nothing wrong with 2003. I installed it on my T61 the first day I got it, and have never had any issues. All of the XP drivers worked for me, and it's extremely fast. I could imagine that 2000 is faster, but I'd be concerned about the lack of security updates.

Follow this article. http://win2k3.msfn.org/index.htm

It will guide you in turning 2003 server into workstation mode. It will help you reduce overhead and basically make 2003 look like 2000. There are many other docs out there like this too.

Some who are against 2003 either can't get an actual licensed copy, or have installed it but just simply missed something when installing the XP drivers.

You might run into an app here or there that isn't compatible with 2003. I get around it by running the app on VMWare.

Here's what I do. I have a 6 mo old base install of 2003 and I'm only running VMWare and Office. that's it. All of my other junk apps or whatever runs inside the VMWare. It's super clean, with about at 10 second boot up time when the heavy services are disabled.

lithium726 wrote:You are aware that Win2k SP4/RC1 actually has a larger footprint in memory than WinXP SP2/3 and that the security in XP is far better, yes? The WiFi support is also far improved. I put off upgrading to XP until SP2 came out, but after that, there was no reason to stick with 2k. I've also had more blue screens with new hardware and 2k than I have with XP, which has had NONE in years.

If I were you, I would try to aquire an XP Pro OEM CD and do a full, clean install. Not the R&R bloated lenovo BS. A clean XP install flies. You can try to download an ISO somewhere on the internet (NOTE: This is NOT illegal. He has a legit OEM Key)

as a side note, if you're looking for security and windows you really need to look into Vista... no other MS OS can hold a candle to Vista's network stack.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_sp1.asp
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/windowsxp_sp2.asp
http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/xp_sp3.asp

I like this recommendation. For a clean install process for XP, I recommend this thread:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=188992


Good luck....and don't forget to post back on the thread your results.

22.02.08

Obtaining w2k3 R2 tomorrow, and doing the server -> workstation dance.

I'll let you know what happens. If it fails i'll go the XP route, i'm just inherently suspicious of XP and as w2k has a IP stack ripped from BSD i ultimately feel it fares better under any net weather than anything microsoft could ever cook up in their codeslave pens.

EDIT: Correction to the above, i meant that if w2k3 r2 doesent work i'll try vanilla w2k pro sp4 and if that fails XP sp2! - At this time i'm benchmarking w2k3 and seeing if i can get everything working there that i need. Will prolly still remove it and compare benchmarks with w2k to see if i can sqeeze a couple of more CPU cycles out of w2k over w2k3. I seriously doubt XP can compete (let alone vista) but we'll see!

And as far as vista is conserned, let's not even go there. I'll die of old age before having anything to do with it.


23.02

Right, This is now WORK IN PROGRESS, will be updating (editing) this post through the day. Win 2003 R2 is installing in SATA combatibility mode.

- What's the status -

*Installed W2K3 R2 - Done
-SATA failed -> combatibility mode in 'bios' solved the problem.
*Installing hardware drivers
*Finished update, and for those who know what ZOMFG and *effing* means:
-ZOMFG this is *EFFING* brilliant! The system stopped napping right away! I'm NEVER touching XP again!
*continuing with windows update ~20MB to go
-Windows update completed
*Thinkvantage update fails on init, removed.
-Unknown devices, beginning to hunt drivers for them
--Device manager sees the following unknown devices:
- 3x Base System Device
(Unav drivers seemed to resolve these)
- Biometric Coprosessor
- Modem Device or High Definition Audio Bus
- PCI Device
(This was SDA SD Host Controller osda06us.exe on lenovos site)
- 2x Unknown device
(1- Unknown device - ACPI\ATM1200\4&374ccb25&0
This is the Trusted Platform Device. -Not installing
2- PCI Device - PCI\VEN_1180&DEV0822&SUBSYS_20C817AA&REV_21\4&3B3A03B5&0&02f0
Seemed to go away on the SD reader install(edit: maybe back))
*Driver hunt complete
-Did not install driver for TPM, Modem and Fingerprint reader (as of yet, now installed, was 79za05ww.exe from lenovo site)
*Screen Hz was 40 after Nvidia NVS m140 driver install -> 60Hz
*PCI Device (unknown) Popped back to haunt startup/login,
have to look into maing this annoyance go away..

*Did the server -> workstation dance and double cheked as per
http://win2k3.msfn.org/

-Touching up many small things and benchmarking

Ok, first the 3dMarks, 03 and 05
2 Runs on each. 1 straight from boot and 1 after browsing the net for a while.

3dMark 03 Settings: 1024x768, no pixel processing, Optimal Texture Filtering, Aniso at 4, Vertex shader Optimal

Run 1 Straight from boot: 6484 3DMarks
Run 2 after browsing for a while: 6491 3DMarks

3DMark 05 (free)
1024x768, no anti aliasing, optimal filtering, HLSL VS&PS 3.0, fixed off.

Run 1 freshly booted
3DMarks: 3379.0
Run 2 After browsing a bit.
CPUMarks: 7262.0
3DMarks: 3381.0

SuperPI 1.1 by Kanada Lab. Tokio Uni.

64K 1s
128K 2s
256K 4s
512 10s
1M 23s
2M 56s
4M 2:11s
8M 4:56s
16M 10:55s
32M 23:53s

** Done for today, more to come tomorrow. Feel free to comment!

*Unknown PCI device was ACHI SATA driver
-All devices now have drivers and working a-ok

**Ok, the os works like a charm, below are a couple of pointers for those interested in running w2k3 on their t61 (or any computer for that matter) as a workstation conversion.

* Some programs require non-server Os to run
Most notably antivirus scanner AVG requires the PRO version which
runs a bigger pricetag than the (free) version available for non server os.



--Zaph

It's been said that XP is an enhanced version of w2k. I'm not qualified enough technically to comment on this, but both seem to do very well running programs after resetting some 'extra' features.

There are also advantages to running 'lightweight' computers.

Will be interested to hear what setup you end up with.

Zaph, I'm impressed with your detail. I hope it works out for you.

Installing w2k at the moment. Will let you know how it goes.
W2k3 developed many clitches and hickups during the 20 or so days of use. First went VLC player that started to flicker, then the computer started to sporadicly crash explorer.exe on startup and the program had to be restarted. Then it started to take 'naps' just as the factory installed XP does.

A point of interest: w2k install CD does NOT recognise the partition format after the w2k3 install and reports it as damaged -> all data must be evacuated from the target machine before w2k install is feasable, otherwise you'll format it in the process. (Edit: You could try Paragon Partition Manager 8.5+ for servers to convert (downgrade) the partition to be combatible with w2k, i tired 2 times and both times it coughed up and didn't deliver, your milage may vary depending on the NTFS conversion method/tool you use)

Other point: moving 130GB of movies thru USB takes something like 3 hours. (your milage may vary, but in any case a LONG coffee break)
I advice Using multiple USB ports and maybe allso transfer a portion over ethernet.



--Zaph

Zaph wrote:What's the best OS config for T61

In my opinion it's Windows XP or Windows Vista. The reason is that Microsoft will support these operating systems with security updates for a longer period of time than they will support Windows 2000.
Security update support for:
Windows 2000 Professional: until July 2010
Windows Vista Home / Ultimate: until April 2012
Windows XP: until April 2014
Windows Vista Business / Enterprise: until April 2017

Hi Zaph

I understand you hate Vista - lots of people do - but to me market reaction is exactly the same than when XP came out. SP1 should fix a lot of issues, SP2 as well etc. Personally I do not share majority's opinion about Vista and I am very pleased with my vanilla Vista 64 bits install so far (even without SP1).
If you don't want it, go for XP SP2 (3?). There's no benefit of having 2000 instead of XP. You'll only get unsupported devices, discontinued windows updates in the near future, etc.
Regarding the memory footprint difference between 2000 and XP, it's no relevant nowadays with 2GB+ of RAM ...
For me the only real choice in the Windows world today is :
- XP SP2/3 32 bits if you do not need more than 3GB of RAM
- Vista 64 bits if you need more than 3GB of RAM
As it's been said above, 2003 server is an option, but a hard one as even when turned into a workstation you can't install everything on it. It then requires a XP in a VMware ... And would you really want to pay for a server OS license ??

Just my 2 cents

Bertrand

Vista is the ejaculate from the testes of the father of lies, abbadon, the king of this world, the enemy Lucifer.

Some benefits of W2k over XP include:

*Smaller image size -> loads faster over net
*Smaller userbase -> Less likely to be chosen as a target os for malware etc.
*Faster startup -> Only by a few seconds but it adds up over life
*Longer time in use -> Battlehardened, tried and true
*Ripped IP stack -> does not originate from microsoft so points from there, the BSD ip stack surpasses anything MS has coded still.
*Nearing end of life -> Abandoned projects get userland support and tend to grow from where they have been left off by the original vendor
*No more security updates -> It's been around for so long that it's nearing the point where it doesent need updating
*Comes without the XP eyecandy -> Saves me the trouble of turning it off
*Source code leaked -> Atleast this MS product has had _some_ review by unpartial eyes
*Doesent have XP/VISTA DRM preloaded -> I can piss on MPAA's IP all I want, download and burn DVD's shamelessly listen to audiobooks ripped from the piratebay, use software to get around any copy protection i want and play anything i want without the OS snitching on me.
*No vista tilt bits -> third party drivers (such as the Omega drivers for graphics) usable.
*I have root on my box -> No Vista style "We own your box and won't give you root" attitude.
*Smaller Installation footprint -> Saves disc
*About everything that works on XP works on W2K and W2K is cheaper. (well the latest foobar2000 won't install on W2K, there are some others)
*The startup screen looks a bit professional on W2K and doesent have the child's toy scheme of XP, let alone the stupid XP acronym. (or homonym or whatever, this is my third language, consider me disclaimed)


I'll edit this post when i remember any other benefits, this was just from the top of my head

And by the way, can anyone tell me what the remaining (UNKNOWN) PCI Device after a clean install of w2k and running lenovos updater tool is?
Comes with info PCI bus 21, device 0, function 2 and uses f8101800-f81018ff memory range and Int 11 as resources.
All other drivers went in without a clitch and are evidently working.
So I'll prove you wrong on the 'unsupported hardware' part of your ridiculous reply when i get it working.

In addition, i totally disagree about what you said about the only 'choise' i think you are being absurd and maybe lacking in experience. I find that comment abusive towards the intellect of this board and towards me in particular.

What you said about the memory footprint not mattering, i protest even louder, ofcourse it matters, It's thought processes like yours that has gottens the IT community such monstrositys as .NET (50mb footprint to implement a telnet or so.) JAVA (well some functionality but even tho it's a 'mature' product most things done with it are total excrement and to day i have seen less than 5 programs that were elegant and usable and most of those were made by SUN) It's idiots that think that something doesent matter because you have the resources in plenty that have spoiled true coding and instead we have products like norton's suite of 'security' tools that drag your comp to a crawl, fill up your HD, won't uninstall elegantly and are prolly providing more entry vectors to the system that stopping them. The same is evident in VISTA and part of the reason why i detest it and everyone who uses it. Poor IT hygiene.

I really wish you wouldn't have replied to this thread, you spoiled my day and diminished my faith in human kind, a tiny facet of kindness towards fellow men eroded.

thanks,

--Zaph

MOD EDIT: Criticize the ideas, not the people. Read the forum rules carefully: http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=14339

You can also add that w2k does not require activation to work which in fact is nothing more but another missed antypiracy mechanism.

Zaph wrote:What you said about the memory footprint not mattering,(...)Poor IT hygiene.

Finally, i meet someone with realistic point of view for that "user friendly" soft written in these "modern languages" like c#, java, vb.
My first and most important rule is that OS has to be small, fast ande stable at first and relativelly simple. The best compromise of all that is in W2k. My regrets that i can't use it anymore and since XP is out of discussion (for many reasons) i changed to Server 2003 which is not ideal but far better than XP.

Rbena-
"It's been said that XP is an enhanced version of w2k. I'm not qualified enough technically to comment on this,"
Well, here's what MS techs have said at technical and channel meetings. Windows2000 is NT5.0, as you'll see on any command prompt. You may recall that NT5 was supposed to ship in 1999, not 2000, and it shipped a full year late. IIRC Gates removed the head of the team and replaced him with James Alchin (?) who had the instructions to "ship or die!" with the new target date.
The delays had been caused by feature bloat and attempts to build better legacy support (to capture the Win9x gamers) and support newfangled hardware like USB instead of IR. The edict from Gates was to finish what could be finished quickly, cut out what didn't work or couldn't be made to work, and ship the [censored] product because no new OS meant no sales, no income, big problem.
So Windows2000 shipped as "NT5 as best as we can". And when the legacy support was finished, and the new drivers were finished, NT5.1 (a dot-one incremental upgrade) was shipped as "Windows XP". Of course with a new GUI and new marketing. See for yourself, the command line in XP says NT5.1, it is just a "dot one" upgrade to Windows2000 and most of the core code is exactly the same.
In contrast, early in the development of Vista MS was taking a lot of flack for being insecure and unstable and wrong at the basic levels of their coding. MS actually shut down all new coding projects for nearly two months while they retrained their programmers in security basics and switched to "team programming" where one task was assigned to a team of two programmers, instead of one task per programmer, in the belief that teams are better at checking each other's work and will produce a more effective result. That's a major financial committment, and supposedly a batch of the new Vista code was scrapped as a result of this--pushing back the Vista release in order to make sure stablitiy and security were top priorities.
All of this according to MS speakers at MS presentations.
Vista is NT6.0, with new core code--not just new features and a glossy GUI. And the "minor" changes from NT5 to NT5.1 aren't always so minor, in areas like compatibility XP code can do things that W2K just can't.
Are they all the same? Well...I don't think so. There are arguments to be made for running older OSes, but there are also good reasons to run the new ones. Among them, as any vintage NT user will tell you, is that you don't install any version of NT on any hardware until and unless you run the compatibility test tool to make sure that hardware properly supports the OS. Is the computer isn't logo certified (HCL) and/or doesn't pass the compatibility test--it will never be stable. And then of course, everyone blames the OS.
Sure, you can jam a Chevy engine in a vintage Jaguar because everyone knows Delco electricals are more stable than Lucas ones. But then try to find a mechanic who'll work on it. There are reasons they don't want to work on a FrankenCar. Same thing when the hardware and the OS don't match. There's way more going on inside the OS than meets the casual eye.

hellosailor wrote:Well, here's what MS techs have said(...) All of this according to MS speakers at MS presentations.

You are missing 4 service packs released for w2k (6 if count unofficial ones). And they are not just packed together security updates. W2k with sp4 is no more or less capable that XP (not including sp2). Even running applications in compatibility mode is available in w2k (added with sp2 but it has to be manually registered to make it accessilble). So how xp is better than 2k? From my point of view those minor upgrades in xp that you are refering to cause more trouble than they are worth. Thanks to them xp is far more unstable and consumes more memory. The only flaw of w2k is that MS is contninously trying to kill it by releasing new soft that denies to install on it.

Zaq-
"You are missing 4 service packs released for w2k ... So how xp is better than 2k? "

If you think that SP's fix and improve "everything", then take a look at how XP handles WiFi connections, and show me how W2K SP4 has added that same feature set to W2K. Or how the XP Firewall has been added to W2K.

Compatibility code? Yes, there is some in W2K now, but I wouldn't bet on it being the same as XP. The SPs do some catch-up, but they are not intended to make an older OS into a new one.

You like NT5 and it is "enough" for you, that's fine. Of course by that logic you could and perhaps should be running MS-DOS 5.0, which is an even leaner and faster OS? No?

Newer OSes always have newer larger feature sets. If you don't need 'em, don't buy 'em. Just be aware that they ARE different internally--even if it is just a "dot one" incremental upgrade--and those differences will almost never be totally visible to the casual user. Or to anyone who hasn't review the six million? or so lines of code in them?

And, as W2K is tombstoned before XP, you can expect security updates and patches to stop sooner. That should be of more concern, no matter how well you firewall and scan, at this point. I still have W2K on one machine--it's enough. But I sure didn't put it on the new one, where I'm willing to trade off raw speed for a larger feature set.

Zaph wrote:Vista is the ejaculate ..... I really wish you wouldn't have replied to this thread, you spoiled my day and diminished my faith in human kind, a tiny facet of kindness towards fellow men eroded.

Wow -- I learnt so much about computers and about myself in a few lines, thank you.
You ask other people's opinion, I gave mine, you reply by insult --> you know what ? Do whatever you want with your wonderful Windows 2000 install, none of my business after all. Yes I am happy with Vista 64, and I say it. May I remind you that you have created this thread with a poll You're a very funny troll.