I've had 7 32bit running on my Athlon XP 2800+ for years. 2GB of memory.

Haven't been able to put a SSD in there since my brother took it to college.

Only issue I noticed when I first upgraded it to 7 was if you use a shitty AGP video card with shitty drivers then Aero was slow as hell. Switching to XP drivers or using a decent video card with decent drivers fixes that.

Security and speed wise you'd be better off sticking with Linux but issue with Athlon XP is no SSE2 which alot of software is requiring. (Firefox doesn't require SSE2)

No risks are being overplayed and people should be pushed to newer versions of Windows.

You can run Windows as long as you want but once support ends then you are screwed (XP can still get some updates by using the POS updates).

Extended support for 7 ends in 2020 so you'd be good for quite a few years.

The Athlon XP 2400+ is going to be a little pokey on the modern Web no matter what you do. If you want to squeeze a few more years out of the machine, though, the first thing I would do is max out the RAM. 1 GB seems to be the bare minimum for Web browsing these days, but 2 GB will be much better if you plan on opening multiple tabs or applications at once.

Secondly, you might try one of the lighter Debian-based Linux distributions, such as Lubuntu or Xubuntu. It looks like PCLinuxOS uses KDE, which has traditionally been a heavier desktop environment. I'm running Xubuntu 14.04 on my netbook with no problems (Atom N450, 2 GB of RAM). It's a little slow, but still usable.

Don't feel compelled to buy a new machine and switch to Windows 8 when it comes time to upgrade, though. For $$, you could easily get a nice Core 2 Duo machine that would positively fly with any modern Linux distro.

I'd say the risks of XP are overplayed, so long as you DO NOT USE INTERNET EXPLORER, which by now will be a huge gaping security hole.

Also, with Linux, it probably needs the tweak to reduce "swappiness"

If you're not going to be using any private information, why the heck are you that worried about security? Keep backups of your most precious files (which you should do in any case, hardware fails after some years), keep free of weird websites (when something sounds too good to be true, you'd best stay clear) and just be careful with what you run and install on your PC.

I can't really tell if you have a semi-modern PC as your primary computer or you're using much much older PCs, but decent PCs can be had for very low these days. Getting yourself something that will last for years is easy and relatively inexpensive, so you can use whatever modern OS you feel like using.

Windows 7 runs on netbooks (Starter Edition) so give it a go! RAM is the big one. 2 GB minimum I would say 😀

Why would you run internet on that kind of slow systems, with already years non-supporting OS..

Buy some decent hardware with windows 7 and you are good to go.

And if you dont have not to much money for a system, better go for a Socket 775 one with windows 7.

It'll run 7. But As things take advantage of multi-core, single core will start to drag.

And yes, I am quite sure the risks are overplayed. If you stay away from questionable sites and don't open spam emails, the chance of exploit is low
I wouldn't suggest the Average Joe and Sue run XP but somebody that knows something about computers should be safe with it.

I would agree that it's time for an upgrade. Even running Vista on my twin-Xeon (which has SSE2) was pushing it for web browsing imho (I just tried it for fun). LGA 775 would be a good direction if you want to build something cheap, but if you really just need the machine for browsing and communication, why not look at a modern compact/efficiency PC like the Asus Vivo or Mac Mini? Really no reason to stick to Windows if you aren't gaming, so OS X and Linux are also completely viable options there imho (and I would take OS X over Linux because it's much more polished).

and I would take OS X over Linux because it's much more polished

And much more $$$

Linux works fine for web browsing. It can be a pain to set up though

Refurbished systems are cheap and come with Windows 7. PM me in case you are in the USA and want a coupon code of a leading refurbisher. 😊

Thanks for all the feedback.

I was looking at my frefox tabs and it says "gpu disabled" and "webgl disabled for driver issues". COULD be one of the reasons why it is so slow. I am using a Radoen9600 SE.

I have a feeling I could get much better performance out of XP. How secure it would be is debatable. I am sure someone will jump on me for saying this - linux has come a long way but it is still pretty much a hack.

I actually HAVE an identical system running XP. I swore I would never put it on the web. With linux, push come to shove I can wipe the whole thing and re-install. Can't do that with XP - not without having to re-activate.

I have a spare copy of XP never opened and was saving for a rainy day - I suppose it might not hurt to try it

I actually looked at win7 machines on dell.com. I could probably buy one cheaper than build it. But I just like computers that I set up because push come to shove I know I can get it back to an operational status. When you buy a PC like that do you even GET a copy of the OS anymore? Or do you have to send it in when the disk crashes?

ncmark wrote:

Thanks for all the feedback. […]
Show full quote

Thanks for all the feedback.

I was looking at my frefox tabs and it says "gpu disabled" and "webgl disabled for driver issues". COULD be one of the reasons why it is so slow. I am using a Radoen9600 SE.

I have a feeling I could get much better performance out of XP. How secure it would be is debatable. I am sure someone will jump on me for saying this - linux has come a long way but it is still pretty much a hack.

I actually HAVE an identical system running XP. I swore I would never put it on the web. With linux, push come to shove I can wipe the whole thing and re-install. Can't do that with XP - not without having to re-activate.

I have a spare copy of XP never opened and was saving for a rainy day - I suppose it might not hurt to try it

I actually looked at win7 machines on dell.com. I could probably buy one cheaper than build it. But I just like computers that I set up because push come to shove I know I can get it back to an operational status. When you buy a PC like that do you even GET a copy of the OS anymore? Or do you have to send it in when the disk crashes?

Here are two screenshots showing how lean you can run XP (SP3) if you dont care much about security. Be sure you stay behind a router of some sort.
If you do not use a Wifi network card you can turn of even more stuff but many of the network services are needed.

ncmark wrote:

When you buy a PC like that do you even GET a copy of the OS anymore? Or do you have to send it in when the disk crashes?

New machines usually only come with hidden restore partitions. However, Microsoft has made ISOs available that allow you to burn your own Windows 7 installation media (see here). You can use one of these to install, then use the product key on your COA to activate. This has worked for me without issues.

ncmark wrote:

I have a feeling I could get much better performance out of XP. How secure it would be is debatable.

Windows XP only performs well if you skip on antivirus software, and then it is most definitely NOT secure. Heck, it's not even secure with antivirus software.

You might be able to finagle a smaller memory footprint with XP SP3 than with a Debian-based distro, but Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs that it won't make much of a difference.

Bottom line: going back to Windows XP is not a practical solution. My advice would be to either delve deeper into the Linux world, or bite the bullet and upgrade to a newer Windows 7 machine.

Really, don't go browsing the web with Windows XP. Security was always a nightmare on XP, and now that it's not being updated, things are only going to get worse 😒

For Linux snappiness on weaker hardware, a lightweight window manger is probably better.
Lubuntu - with the very light LXDE
Xubuntu - with XFCE
Or Linux Mint XFCE - Linux Mint has several variations - Cinnamon is the heaviest, followed by Mate, then XFCE.
Mint also has KDE (heavy) and Debian (based on the rolling release Debian, instead of the UBUNTU codebase)

2gb of ram is a must, Vista Home Basic is an awesome option if you have a spare key on hand. Windows 7 basic would work great as well. Linux I would suggest Linux Mint Mate or XFCE. If you can upgrade your agp card to something that support hardware acceleration you might see a good performance increase. TBH it is not worthwhile to spend $100 on an agp 4670 for example but it would be pretty cheap to upgrade to something a little heavier than your current 9600. If your motherboard supports a faster Athlon xp see about buying one for cheap on ebay. All around it is not worth investing more than $50ish into a daily web browser single core machine. You can blow $100 and buy a pretty nice little refurb dual core machine that will web browse like a boss.

smeezekitty wrote:

And much more $$$

Oh of course. But I have no idea if we're even working within a budget, and since it sounds like this "new computer" isn't really for gaming, there's no reason to confine it to Windows other than familiarity. So I mention Mac because it's a fine option if you aren't gaming. 😊

ncmark wrote:

I actually HAVE an identical system running XP. I swore I would never put it on the web. With linux, push come to shove I can wipe the whole thing and re-install. Can't do that with XP - not without having to re-activate.

There's no problem with re-activation as long as you aren't doing it daily, and aren't trying to activate the same key on a ton of different machines. AFAIK even if you did do it daily, they won't stop you, they just require you to phone-in to their automated thing vs doing it fully online. As far as I know the XP activation service is still online as well. 😊

ODwilly wrote:

2gb of ram is a must, Vista Home Basic is an awesome option if you have a spare key on hand. Windows 7 basic would work great as well. Linux I would suggest Linux Mint Mate or XFCE. If you can upgrade your agp card to something that support hardware acceleration you might see a good performance increase. TBH it is not worthwhile to spend $100 on an agp 4670 for example but it would be pretty cheap to upgrade to something a little heavier than your current 9600. If your motherboard supports a faster Athlon xp see about buying one for cheap on ebay. All around it is not worth investing more than $50ish into a daily web browser single core machine. You can blow $100 and buy a pretty nice little refurb dual core machine that will web browse like a boss.

Just to note, many AGP bridged cards will not support much in the way of video hardware acceleration (this is true of nVidia cards, but I don't know about the HD 4670). And even if that weren't an issue, the lack of SSE2 and limited RAM on the AthlonXP will be a killer anyways. I'd agree with getting some sort of new machine - it will be more cost effective than upgrading the AthlonXP.

I actually looked at win7 machines on dell.com. I could probably buy one cheaper than build it. But I just like computers that I set up because push come to shove I know I can get it back to an operational status. When you buy a PC like that do you even GET a copy of the OS anymore? Or do you have to send it in when the disk crashes?

Both of my "new" machines have had recovery partitions that are visible from within Windows, and actually make re-loading the system substantially faster/easier than having physical media because it installs a complete image with all of the drivers and whatnot. Of course it will require updates, but so will installs from physical media. Like maximus points out, Microsoft has made ISO images available, and I vaguely remember that Dell and others will offer physical recovery media for a few bucks at purchase-time too. Finally, you can also make a recovery disc or system image with Windows as long as you have some sort of external storage medium of sufficient size.

obobskivich wrote:

There's no problem with re-activation as long as you aren't doing it daily, and aren't trying to activate the same key on a ton of different machines. AFAIK even if you did do it daily, they won't stop you, they just require you to phone-in to their automated thing vs doing it fully online. As far as I know the XP activation service is still online as well. 😊

I actually just did a write-up on this on my website. You can activate XP as many times as you like on the same machine, though a phone call to Microsoft may eventually be involved (as long as it's the same machine, they can't say no).

You can also use the same key to activate XP on multiple machines, provided that the installs are at least 120 days apart. Big loophole there.

And yes, the XP activation servers are still up.

maximus wrote:

I actually just did a write-up on this on my website. You can activate XP as many times as you like on the same machine, though a phone call to Microsoft may eventually be involved (as long as it's the same machine, they can't say no).

You can also use the same key to activate XP on multiple machines, provided that the installs are at least 120 days apart. Big loophole there.

And yes, the XP activation servers are still up.

Thanks for clarifying all of this with more definite figures! 😀

On the subject of restoring XP, a good solution is to image C: with something like Acronis Home Image. Restoring an image is fast and easy without the need for a tedious fresh install and Windows activation. Save the image to another partition or drive and If/when XP gets hosed or infected boot off your recovery disk and restore to a clean backup - voila. Acronis v10 works well with XP. Image restore sidesteps the need to Activate each time unless you change hardware in which case it *may* request activation.

Make a few OS image at different stages: fresh install+Activation, +drivers, + some goodies, +plus all the goodies etc.

This all works best when you only install the OS and a limited selection of critical programs on C:. The image footprint is small, speeding up backup and recovery time. A typical full restore shouldn't take longer than 10 minutes this way.