X20 - Is 192MB enough to Basic Apps?

Message

eddy eddy · #1 Post by **eddy eddy** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:16 pm

Hi there

The guy who sold me the X21 I'm using now has also a X20 for sale.

It's a PIII 500 or 600 (don't remember) and 192 MB. Do you think it can handle Windows 2k or XP using Internet Explorer, Word and Excel without lag?

I'm thinking about buying it and give to my dad but don't want to spend any buck to upgrade it. Just want to know if 192MB is enough for the basics.

thanks
Edson

#2 Post by **tomh009** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:24 pm

It'll be enough for the basics if your dad's not expecting high performance. If you use XP, just turn on classic mode as the XP style (with the rounded corners etc) uses quite a bit of memory.

pianowizard · #3 Post by **pianowizard** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:30 pm

eddy eddy wrote:It's a PIII 500 or 600 (don't remember)

The X20 either had 500MHz Celeron or 600MHz PIII -- I've owned both types. It's important to find out which one he's selling because the former only has 800x600 resolution and your dad would need to scrolling a lot to view web sites. The only advantage of the 800x600 type is that it makes the laptop about 0.3 pounds lighter.

And I agree with Tomh that 192MB is good enough for Windows XP in Classic mode.

mfbernstein · #4 Post by **mfbernstein** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:14 am

eddy eddy wrote:I'm thinking about buying it and give to my dad but don't want to spend any buck to upgrade it. Just want to know if 192MB is enough for the basics.

If you stick to Win2K, and maybe Office 2K, it should be decent. I don't know just how averse you are to upgrading, but a 256MB module can be found for $20 or so if you find it paging too much.

pianowizard · #5 Post by **pianowizard** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:46 am

mfbernstein wrote:a 256MB module can be found for $20 or so if you find it paging too much.

The 256MB low-density PC100 module is still fairly expensive, between $35 and $40 shipped usually. High-density PC133, which is cheaper, won't work.

#6 Post by **underclocker** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:58 pm

It should be OK but somewhat slow. An X22 or newer with similar spec's would be much better. It had the Pentium III-m CPU.

eddy eddy · #7 Post by **eddy eddy** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 5:43 pm

I'm gonna pay (around) $120 for it.

And about the speed, I just don't want to face many lockups caused by low memory.

Don't mind if it is a bit slow but want to be smooth. Actually, my parents never used a computer. I just wanna teach them how to use e-mails, messenger and web browsing so he can stay in touch with the rest of the family.

It should be OK but somewhat slow. An X22 or newer with similar spec's would be much better. It had the Pentium III-m CPU.

I agree with that, but there's one problem. I live in Brazil so it's quite difficult to find Thinkpads for sale here. Can't say about good condition ones...

Bigger problem to buy a new one (loveful taxes and duties). A basic X60 just for US$ 3500 from Lenovo (core duo T2400 and 512MB)

#8 Post by **tomh009** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:08 pm

eddy eddy wrote:I'm gonna pay (around) $120 for it.

And about the speed, I just don't want to face many lockups caused by low memory.

Don't mind if it is a bit slow but want to be smooth. Actually, my parents never used a computer. I just wanna teach them how to use e-mails, messenger and web browsing so he can stay in touch with the rest of the family.

Given that, I think you'll be just fine. And for $120 your parents will have a nice little computer to learn about the Internet.

pianowizard · #9 Post by **pianowizard** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:13 pm

eddy eddy wrote:I just wanna teach them how to use e-mails, messenger and web browsing so he can stay in touch with the rest of the family.

Half of the X20 models only have a modem but not built-in ethernet. If the one you're getting is one of those, you will need to get a PCMCIA card.

#10 Post by **tomh009** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:15 pm

A good point. Ethernet cards are not expensive, but it (or a wireless card) will still add to the $120 initial cost.

#11 Post by **underclocker** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:08 pm

For $120, if it's in decent shape, it's worth it. You won't have lock ups due to low memory, it'll just be a little slow on booting and opening apps., but they will run smoothly once opened.

rek · #12 Post by **rek** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 8:08 am

You'll be fine, so long as you keep to applications of the equivalent time era. e.g. Windows 2000 and Office 97/2000 should be golden.

I've run Win2k + Office 97 on a Libretto 110CT with 64MB of RAM (!!!) With a little bit of tuning it's possible to get a base Win2k install using only ~45MB of RAM.

About the only thing that might give it stress are poorly coded, Flash ad-heavy web sites.. a browser with a good popup- and ad-blocker should make short work of those useless Flash ads though, and also make browsing the web a little less daunting for your folks.

On the network card issue: if it doesn't have onboard LAN, I'm sure you'd be able to find some old 10Mbit ethernet PCMCIA cards for super cheap (if not free) from a local computer nut's box of old junk. It'll be more than enough for internet. (If such a card is necessary, try to get an old Xircom PCMCIA card as they have excellent driver support, right out of the Windows install. A lot of older no-name PCMCIA network cards can be a real bear to hunt down drivers.)

#13 Post by **tomh009** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 8:18 am

rek wrote:About the only thing that might give it stress are poorly coded, Flash ad-heavy web sites.. a browser with a good popup- and ad-blocker should make short work of those useless Flash ads though, and also make browsing the web a little less daunting for your folks.

Firefox with FlashBlock improves performance quite nicely ...

And Windows XP will be just fine, when appropriately configured.

qviri · #14 Post by **qviri** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 8:27 am

tomh009 wrote:And Windows XP will be just fine, when appropriately configured.

I would disagree - I've seen XP run on a P3-500 laptop with 192 MB of RAM (128 MB before I upgraded it

) and appropriately configured, the performance would be adequate at best. I am also not convinced that one can trust a computer given to parents to stay appopriately configured.

mattbiernat · #15 Post by **mattbiernat** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:19 am

- use something lighter than firefox, i would go with opera or even IE7.
- if you gonna go with XP make sure to tweak it to bare bones so that you can have more ram for other apps. for example try turning off servies that you are not going to use (keep only the critical and security services enabled), get rid of start up applications, in my computer preferances turn off all visual effects, i would also disable drivers thta you don't use - althought i don't know if it would help ram. im sure there is more ways to get your XP flying even with this litte ram.

you can see which services you wanna disable here:http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm

#16 Post by **tomh009** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:08 am

qviri wrote:I would disagree - I've seen XP run on a P3-500 laptop with 192 MB of RAM (128 MB before I upgraded it ) and appropriately configured, the performance would be adequate at best. I am also not convinced that one can trust a computer given to parents to stay appropriately configured.

Hmmm ... our second X31 was running with 256 MB for quite a while (with 1.4 GHz, but that really doesn't matter so much) with an out-of-the-box, untuned XP installation. It was OK for the basics like web surfing and basic Office tasks. Turning off the XP theme saves some additional memory yet.

What did you find was the bottleneck at 192 MB? Was everything swapping to disk?

XP is officially supported even on 64 (!) MB, with 128 MB recommended. 192 MB really should be functional.

qviri · #17 Post by **qviri** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:42 am

Hmm, I can't really answer in depth, seeing as my experience lasted for something like 15 minutes. But what I do know:

- it's possible the installation was an upgrade from Windows 98. I am not sure.
- the hard drive was old and more than likely 4200 rpm.
- with 128 MB and the standard XP theme, it was slow to the point of being painful. I would imagine plenty of disk caching went on.
- with 192 MB (I was hoping to bring it up to 256 MB, but it had two 64 MB sticks rather than one 128 MB) and the standard XP theme, it was a bit faster, but not yet what I would describe as adequate.

I've run Windows 2000 on 128 MB of RAM and it is adequate. I would really recommend 256 MB for XP, especially if someone computer-savvy won't be nearby regularly to keep the machine clean. YMMV.

#18 Post by **tomh009** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 11:05 am

I agree that more would be better with XP -- even a 128 MB stick to bring it up to 256 MB. The OP should be able to find a 256 MB low-density module (for 384 MB total) for around $30, I think.

But even with 192 MB ... I'd still go with XP, as long as it's set up with unnecessary bits uninstalled.

mattbiernat · #19 Post by **mattbiernat** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:12 am

put enough bloatwere and your XP will be slow even with 512mb. again IMO all it takes is some fine tuning before you give the PC to your parents

Elwyn · #20 Post by **Elwyn** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:05 am

Ok, for my personal opinion, I'd say Yes for most things.

My previous laptop was a Toshiba 4080 XCDT. 20gb HDD, 192mb Ram, plus all the usual bits (FDD, IR, USB, Serial, Parallel, Docking port, PCMCIA).

I had XP Pro running on it, didn't especially tweak it much but knew what I had running and kept it running well. The processor on that is a 366mhz and coped.

It coped in the way that it ran faster than most freinds' machines at over 1ghz, mostly due to all the [:oops:

] they ran on them

Ran MSOffice 2k, Thunderbird, Firefox, Total Annihilation

plus a whole bunch of other utils and the like, but kept it running ok

As a mere office machine it should work ok

eddy eddy · #21 Post by **eddy eddy** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Finally I grabbed the X20!! $130

Good news: It's nice and great shape! (P3 600 192MB 40GB)

Bad news: It's nice and great shape! Way better than my X21

which I paid $190.

Unlike mine, doesn't have scratches and paint isn't chipping. The hinges are very tight holding the LCD in any position and battery lasts for 1 hour.

I've installed W2K and can say it runs smoothly (Internet). Only gets slow in flash-heavy pages.

Now I'm trying to find my old Office CD (97).

Elwyn · #22 Post by **Elwyn** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:33 am

Ok, I'd reccomend you look at "Portable Software". I can't remember who do it, but I think its... Portable Apps, surprisingly enough

Unless you specifically want MS products

I'm using that at the mo on my X30 and it's fine for me. There are also a whole bunch of utilities I've built up over the years which work well with older machines

Good Luck

Elwyn[/url]

X20 - Is 192MB enough to Basic Apps?

X20 - Is 192MB enough to Basic Apps?

Re: X20 - Is 192MB enough to Basic Apps?

Re: X20 - Is 192MB enough to Basic Apps?

Re: X20 - Is 192MB enough to Basic Apps?

Who is online