I installed this once on a P2 laptop quite some years ago. Found it on a torrent site. Never gotten around to do something with the laptop and sold it soon afterwards.
A P3 that I bought a year ago, also came with fundamentals installed but I still need to do some upgrades and driver installs before I try some games on it.
I don't think you can use a XP key on this one.
On YT there is a video from someone who installs it and the key is in the description. But I'm guessing it's not so legal 😀

I can't see why it wouldn't work, but the question is why? Windows 98 or 2000 will still be faster

I would do it just because it's available 😀
And for testing of course.

I have it, and I've used ir for a time, it's basically a capped XP, based on windows XP embedded but with less features (more than XP starter though).
It's designed for thin clients so it's smaller than xp, and you can choose not to install internet explorer (it'll bring less compatibility and headaches though), but the drivers sometimes are a bit fiddly, as they're not designed for this os, also some software will not install on it.
Directx full support is also optional but has around the same performance.
Overall I'll stick with standard XP sp3 Pro, because on FLP is very hard to find some of the updates that are necessary, also it isn't very convincing the little performance advantage, with xp you can get to the same performance disabling services

No point to this. It existed to provide a SUPPORTED version of windows on hardware that couldn't run full windows, so corps could still get support without upgrading fleets of crappy low profile oem PCs that could do little more than run Excel.

It is corporate junk. Zero interest for retro enthusiasts.

What they said.

WinFLP was a temporary fix for corporations & schools that had scores of Win98 machines that did not meet XP's minimum system requirements.
It allowed them to use the old W98 machines as thin clients with XP's networking security improvements until such time as they could upgrade to actual XP class machines.

The only legal way to get it was to be a Microsoft Software Assurance customer.
It was never legally distributed any other way.

Not that I personally care if you use it but this whole thread is pushing on Vogons rules about piracy discussions.

I played with it some trying to come up with a diagnostic Live-CD that would run XP utilities on older machines.
Wanted to use it to test mobos after working on them.
I am not particularly talented with that sort of thing and I never pulled it off.
.

If you need a lightweight XP then get an ebay copy of say XP SP1, just don't let it touch the internet

For me I was looking for XP to run from CD so I could save workbench time by skipping the OS to HDD installation routine.
I have other ways but I thought XP might be treat because of the vast number of diagnostic utilities available for it.
.

My main "modern" PC is a Mac, so I actually use Windows FLP in Parallels to run tools like WinImage (write floppy images), ImgBurn (CD images) and Dreamblaster software. To me it's just the most lightweight and relatively modern version of Windows, so it's a nice alternative to Wine. I've also played some Baldur's Gate with mods under this version, but never anything too graphically demanding.

I've been using FLP for quite some years now on a thin client running 24/7, although not for gaming. For me the driving factor to try them was the thin client's small storage. FLP's size is something like 1/4 or 1/5 of a normal & updated XP installation.

Yes they are modern enough (so not like 2000), yes they are a bit lighter (just a tiny bit though) and finally yes, they do lack a lot of stuff. From the simplest things like the ping command, to the "compatibility" tab -since you mentioned retro gaming, to the tricks required just to install .NET Framework 3.5.

So bottom line if you don't have specific reasons (low storage or low memory to the point were XP can't run at all), don't prefer FLP over normal XP. The more generic use you want to put them to, the more problems you'll face. And all this for a slightly improved responsiveness, which I'm not even sure you'll continue to experience if you start installing stuff.

PCBONEZ wrote:

For me I was looking for XP to run from CD so I could save workbench time by skipping the OS to HDD installation routine.
I have other ways but I thought XP might be treat because of the vast number of diagnostic utilities available for it.
.

There is a way to do this with regular versions of XP, using a program called PEBuilder. You can use it to create a custom bootable ISO image of WinXP called BartPE. It's a fairly old tool though and the original website for it has been taken down, but you can still read up about it and get it from the internet archive. https://web.archive.org/web/20130323040208/ht … u2.nu/pebuilder

Keep in mind, though, that the programs you'd be able to run under BartPE are fairly limited. IIRC by default, no .NET framework or DirectX is included, and the "hard drive" that it uses while running is a fairly small RAM drive of only a few hundred megabytes, limiting your ability to install new programs at runtime (Which you'd then have to reinstall every time you rebooted BartPE). So, your best option is to use strictly "portable" apps that don't require installation, and keep them on a USB flash drive. Even this is not guaranteed to work for every portable app though (I remember the portable version of Ad-Aware SE used to make BartPE throw up a BSOD because it tried to load a driver that doesn't work under PE mode).

@ torindkflt
Thanks - Have it.
The weak program support was why I was looking at WinFLP.
I'm not good with that stuff though and I set it aside over frustration.
I might come back to it later on and try again.
.

Unfortunately, any CD-bootable version of WinFLP would also be running in PE mode, and thus would have the same program limitations as BartPE or any other versions of WinPE. AFAIK there is no way to have a fully-functional version of Windows boot and operate entirely from removable (Non-HDD) media the same as installing it to a hard drive...not without significant modifications that are beyond my knowledge and abilities, anyway.

I might be confused because I was messing with several things about the same time but IIRC WinFLP can be slipped with .NET Framework and Bart can't.
I don't care about DirectX for it though. Purpose is not games.

Played with 7 Thin PC too. That requires a Vista file from some specific beta to mod it.
Tracked it down but by the time I found it I was burnt on the whole idea so I just saved it for later.
.

Thank you all for your replies!

I used to run BartPE over a decade ago, but switched to UBCD4Win because it had way better support for programs and tools. UBCD4Win also used BartPE as its underlying core.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140716215654/ht … w.ubcd4win.com/

Bart also had a fantastic DOS network boot floppy:

https://web.archive.org/web/20140302064304/ht … u2.nu/bootdisk/

squiggly wrote:

It is corporate junk. Zero interest for retro enthusiasts.

So what you're saying is in ten years time boxed copies of it will be on eBay for $1000+? 😀

Qjimbo wrote:

squiggly wrote:

It is corporate junk. Zero interest for retro enthusiasts.

So what you're saying is in ten years time boxed copies of it will be on eBay for $1000+? 😀

AFAIK there were no boxed copies. Probably no stamped CDs either. Just download links for Microsoft's partners.

Qjimbo wrote:

squiggly wrote:

It is corporate junk. Zero interest for retro enthusiasts.

So what you're saying is in ten years time boxed copies of it will be on eBay for $1000+? 😀

Out of interest, how much would a boxed, sealed copy of Windows Me signed by Bill Gates sell for?

I have used Windows ThinPC - basically win7 with missing stuff.
Recent office works just fine with it, steam works, geforce/ati drivers install fine (only tried low end gpus though sine this was an office pc, think gf210 or hd5450) updates do work, chrome installs fine... I am almost certain I installed Microsoft Security Essentials as well and it worked fine too.
It was lighter on resources and faster on a c2d system (missing almost all non-essential services).
Really like it especially if one has some specific task in mind for an older system, maybe a download machine or some surveillance system or something