Upgrading to Win2K
Showing all messages in thread #1044631784 Windows 2000 Annoyances Discussion Forum
The following are all of the messages in this thread (5 in all), shown in chronological order. Click any message subject to view that message by itself or to view the thread hierarchy.
|
Upgrading to Win2K
Friday, February 7, 2003 at 7:29 am Posted by Peter
(3 messages posted)
Is there anyway else so that I can upgrade but bypass the requirements section (as
32mb Ram instead of the eight I have)?? I tried dos, but that won't work...
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Upgrading to Win2K
Friday, February 7, 2003 at 7:58 am Posted by Adam the Wiseguy
(339 messages posted)
8? What are you trying to install it on, a calculator? :-)
Something tells me even if you succeeded in your quest, it wouldn't run. Those minimum
requirements really are a minimum... and I know for sure you can't expect even the
core processes for Win2k to take up less than 8 MB. I can't believe the HDD in that
thing is even big enough to hold the OS. Go buy some RAM of eBay or something.
On Friday, February 7, 2003 at 7:29 am, Peter wrote:
>Is there anyway else so that I can upgrade but bypass the requirements section (as
>32mb Ram instead of the eight I have)?? I tried dos, but that won't work...
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Upgrading to Win2K
Friday, February 7, 2003 at 8:03 am Posted by DavidW
(149 messages posted)
I agree too. My system runs so smoothly at 767MB of DDR Ram. The only operating system
I would try to load with 8MB would be Dos or Windows 3.1
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Upgrading to Win2K
Saturday, February 8, 2003 at 12:25 am Posted by Paul
(263 messages posted)
I doubt your processor is up to requirements either. 8MB? You are kidding right ????
On Friday, February 7, 2003 at 8:03 am, DavidW wrote:
>I agree too. My system runs so smoothly at 767MB of DDR Ram. The only operating
system
>I would try to load with 8MB would be Dos or Windows 3.1
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Upgrading to Win2K
Saturday, February 8, 2003 at 2:57 am Posted by James Oakey
(188 messages posted)
You will never get it to run with only 8 Meg of RAM. I have tried many times to get
it to run on systems with under 64Megs and it has never worked. I don't know why
they made the minimum 32 Megs when it really should have been 64 Megs.
On Friday, February 7, 2003 at 7:29 am, Peter wrote:
>Is there anyway else so that I can upgrade but bypass the requirements section (as
>32mb Ram instead of the eight I have)?? I tried dos, but that won't work...
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
|
Tip: Use one of the [Reply or follow-up to this message] links above to add a message to this thread
|
|
Return to the Windows 2000 Discussion Forum
|