VOGONS

Common searches


suggestions for windows XP

Topic actions

Reply 40 of 60, by dormcat

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
cyclone3d wrote on 2021-08-01, 21:34:

What about on a computer? I don't think an app used to be required... At least not to receive calls.

GVoice.gif
Filename
GVoice.gif
File size
2.33 KiB
Views
660 views
File license
Fair use/fair dealing exception

Thanks for the suggestion, but I think I'll just use other service(s) instead.

Reply 41 of 60, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I wonder how much money Microsoft could "save" by closing down activation servers for WinXP.

There's no dedicated XP servers as of now, but phone activation covers all Microsoft products. It's not really a problem for them to keep algorithm for XP on unified server. And phone servers quickly "forget" about activation of legacy products btw.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 42 of 60, by ncmark

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I wound up parting out the system (asus a7v600). I was already wanting to move that copy of XP to a (more) modern motherboard - due to (1) lack of available CPU coolers, (2) lab of SATA ports. Kinda wanted something like a core 2 duo.
Oh well - not happening now

Reply 43 of 60, by ncmark

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I have actually been thinking about taking a step back to windows 2000 - looks like you can still get them on ebay.
XP filled kind of a "sweet spot" - old enough to run older software with no problem, but new enough to recognize external drives. Not sure about 2000 - how much difference really?

Reply 44 of 60, by chinny22

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I really like 2000. It's more lightweight then XP and bit more compatible win 9x games.
Main drawabacks are you loose some the refinements that were added in XP like decent integrated Wifi support, less hardware is detected during setup and possibly the biggest. 2000 thinks everything is a physical CPU, so it thinks a CPU with Hyper Threading has 2 CPU's installed which is the max 2kPro supports. Something like a Core 2 Duo with 2 cores and 2 threads would be seen as a 4 CPU system and would need 2K server installed to be able to use the entire CPU.

But it also maybe the system is so fast that you don't really notice your not using half the CPU if that kind of thing doesn't bother you.

Reply 46 of 60, by Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
chinny22 wrote on 2021-08-06, 08:36:

I really like 2000. It's more lightweight then XP and bit more compatible win 9x games.

Wait, seriously? I remember trying Windows 2000 Server for games, and the result is not too encouraging. However, it was 2000 Server, perhaps it required more tweaking to run games -Win9x or otherwise.

How about drivers? The latest Radeon GPU to run on Windows XP is Radeon HD 7xxx and GeForce GTX 7xx (GTX 980 could run with driver hacks). What are the latest GPUs supported by Windows 2000?

Never thought this thread would be that long, but now, for something different.....
Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman.

Reply 48 of 60, by RandomStranger

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
chinny22 wrote on 2021-08-06, 08:36:

2000 thinks everything is a physical CPU, so it thinks a CPU with Hyper Threading has 2 CPU's installed which is the max 2kPro supports. Something like a Core 2 Duo with 2 cores and 2 threads would be seen as a 4 CPU system and would need 2K server installed to be able to use the entire CPU.

As far as I'm aware the Core2 never supported HT. At least not the desktop/consumer variants. After the Pentium 4 the HT was on a vacation until the release of the Nehalem.

sreq.png retrogamer-s.png

Reply 50 of 60, by zapbuzz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I remember using this tool called NTSWITCH. I found it had the ability to turn server 2003 into a later xp pro codebase (than the original 2001) but turning xp pro into server 2003 presented a major memory leak prior to SP3. The updated xp base had superior kernel to original xp being from server 2003 release IN EARLIER sp1 sp2 which some people still like to use today than sp3 for some app and game compatabilities (drivers as well).
https://www.theregister.com/2002/03/25/regist … k_turns_xp_pro/
It was initially condemned but it is a win2k version as well. (within same tool)
Those with time bomb eval of win2k server and advanced server could kill the bomb and remove the watermarked desktop.
Apparently in a proper configuration datacenter 2003 server version could install this xp version too from a network boot protocol.
Totally would love the 2003 xp pro make a cool statement with its login box graphic a cool black microsoft logo'd .net 😀
I found it on SF.NET as an open source tool so i guess its accepted as a legit admin tool.
Also, it doesn't matter if its oem, retail, or corporate edition theres just a couple of files in i386 folder of cdrom that determine the edition of xp on the disc.
So there really is no need to go through the entire process of slipstreaming for each edition of xp.
Only applying the correct ones for the accepted cdkey intended.
(damn i forgot their names)

Last edited by zapbuzz on 2021-08-10, 18:10. Edited 2 times in total.

Reply 51 of 60, by FiIosofia

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
RandomStranger wrote on 2021-08-01, 19:36:
ncmark wrote on 2021-08-01, 12:49:

Call me paranoid, but don't tell me micro$oft doesn't record the phone number, and suddenly your phone number is "out there"

That's why I have two prepaid disposable/burner phone numbers in a feature phone (Nokia 130 2017 Dual Sim). One from a domestic service provider another from outside the country. The domestic costs me something like 0.7€ yearly the other costs nothing beyond having to make one call every half a year. These two go to all the services that require a phone number, including insurance companies, auction sites, etc. Same with other contact info. Something needs a valid address? PO box. Email? I use alias services. "Luckily" I happen to have have a very common name. Wherever I'm not required to give certain data I don't do it and If I'm not required to use valid data (or if I don't care if my account will be terminated) I lie.

I only give out my personal phone number to people I personally know. I have that number since 2004 and I have no marketing calls.

That's why you're a random stranger. We could say it started as an exercise, became an addiction.

BGWG as in Boogie Woogie.

Reply 52 of 60, by chinny22

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote on 2021-08-06, 10:03:
chinny22 wrote on 2021-08-06, 08:36:

I really like 2000. It's more lightweight then XP and bit more compatible win 9x games.

Wait, seriously? I remember trying Windows 2000 Server for games, and the result is not too encouraging. However, it was 2000 Server, perhaps it required more tweaking to run games -Win9x or otherwise.

How about drivers? The latest Radeon GPU to run on Windows XP is Radeon HD 7xxx and GeForce GTX 7xx (GTX 980 could run with driver hacks). What are the latest GPUs supported by Windows 2000?

I've only used Pro for gaming PC's, never server. I would think disabling all the Server related entries in services would give similar results but maybe some other optimisations exist in Server that cause issues in games.
Not sure about graphics cards either. Only ever installed on S478 and below where XP can struggle at times.

RandomStranger wrote on 2021-08-06, 10:35:
chinny22 wrote on 2021-08-06, 08:36:

2000 thinks everything is a physical CPU, so it thinks a CPU with Hyper Threading has 2 CPU's installed which is the max 2kPro supports. Something like a Core 2 Duo with 2 cores and 2 threads would be seen as a 4 CPU system and would need 2K server installed to be able to use the entire CPU.

As far as I'm aware the Core2 never supported HT. At least not the desktop/consumer variants. After the Pentium 4 the HT was on a vacation until the release of the Nehalem.

Core 2 doesn't have HT but it does have threads (and cores)
Something like a Core 2 Duo E4200 has 2 cores, 2 threads. Anything below WinXP thinks this is 4 individual CPU's. (or for Win9x will simply ignore)

Reply 53 of 60, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

980TI will work on 2000 but you'll need to install the BWC Kernel.
I only use my Quadro FX 1300 in my 2000 machine, never bothered to see what the max gpu is for vanilla 2000.
As far as server vs WKS they are the same game compatiblity wise, there is a slight difference with 2003 where you had to copy over the DirectMusic files from XP and add some registry entries but that's the only thing I can recall.
Check my game compatibility spreadsheet. (Hasn't been updated in years)

DOSBox Compilation Guides
DosBox Feature Request Thread
PC Game Compatibility List
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Running DRM games offline

Reply 54 of 60, by RandomStranger

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
chinny22 wrote on 2021-08-06, 15:55:
RandomStranger wrote on 2021-08-06, 10:35:
chinny22 wrote on 2021-08-06, 08:36:

2000 thinks everything is a physical CPU, so it thinks a CPU with Hyper Threading has 2 CPU's installed which is the max 2kPro supports. Something like a Core 2 Duo with 2 cores and 2 threads would be seen as a 4 CPU system and would need 2K server installed to be able to use the entire CPU.

As far as I'm aware the Core2 never supported HT. At least not the desktop/consumer variants. After the Pentium 4 the HT was on a vacation until the release of the Nehalem.

Core 2 doesn't have HT but it does have threads (and cores)
Something like a Core 2 Duo E4200 has 2 cores, 2 threads. Anything below WinXP thinks this is 4 individual CPU's. (or for Win9x will simply ignore)

But why would it show 4 CPUs if it only has 2 threads? chrismeyer6 confirms what I'm saying. It's logical for an older OS to display a dual threaded CPU (whether it's HT or physical core) as 2 separate physical CPUs, it is not to display 2 threads (even if both are physical cores) as 4 physical CPU. Unless it's some kind of bug you encountered. There is just no more than 2 threads to detect as CPUs in a dual core without HT.

FiIosofia wrote on 2021-08-06, 12:49:

That's why you're a random stranger. We could say it started as an exercise, became an addiction.

I don't really get what you mean by this.

sreq.png retrogamer-s.png

Reply 56 of 60, by digger

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
zapbuzz wrote on 2021-08-06, 12:02:

I remember using this tool called NTSWITCH. I found it had the ability to turn server 2003 into a later xp pro codebase (than the original 2001) but turning xp pro into server 2003 presented a major memory leak prior to SP3. The updated xp base had superior kernel to original xp being from server 2003 release IN EARLIER sp1 sp2 which some people still like to use today than sp3 for some app and game compatabilities (drivers as well).
https://www.theregister.com/2002/03/25/regist … k_turns_xp_pro/

Interesting. Microsoft actually did basically the same thing when they developed Windows XP Professional x64 edition. Instead of porting the older XP kernel to 64-bit, they basically based XP x64 on the 64-bit version of the Windows Server 2003 kernel, which they had already ported, due to higher memory requirements in the datacenter world.

I actually ran Windows XP x64 as my daily OS at the time, and it ran well. Compatibility with 32-bit software was surprisingly good. I liked the idea of actually making use of the 64-bit capabilities of my Athlon64 system, and pretty much every Windows XP game (and even Win9x games) that I tried ran flawlessly on it. All I lost was Win16 and native DOS compatibility, which was no longer an issue, even then. As a bonus, each 32-bit game or application could make use of as much as 4GB memory, whereas applications would be limited to only 2GB memory on XP 32-bit. I remember reading about some heavier 32-bit games running better on Windows x64, or even crashing on 32-bit Windows due to that difference in memory limitation. I believe Supreme Commander was such a game.

Sorry for the tangent. 😅

Reply 57 of 60, by chrismeyer6

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I myself ran XP pro 64 for a very long time and absolutely loved it. I never had any trouble with any hardware drivers or any games or other software. It just ran so well and it was great to make use of my full 8 gigs of RAM.

Reply 58 of 60, by zapbuzz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

xp x64 had a closed kernel (like all ms x64) meaning those insecure unstable methods of kernel patching by programmers were locked out making it more stable.
Some games used kernel patching that is why one game is now called riso of nations after buyout (hint)
I think windows vista and above closed their 32bit kernel to encourage more proper programming techniques and further stifle hacking bothloal and remotely.
Windows xp plus pack media edition is so cool with the desktop dancers and with plus! xp more skins and themes adds bling to xp without theme patching.

Reply 59 of 60, by zapbuzz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2021-08-02, 00:54:

I wonder how much money Microsoft could "save" by closing down activation servers for WinXP.

There's no dedicated XP servers as of now, but phone activation covers all Microsoft products. It's not really a problem for them to keep algorithm for XP on unified server. And phone servers quickly "forget" about activation of legacy products btw.

I have a caculator for corporate keys so i am covered in that regard. Both home and pro.
There are key generators out there for all editions of xp.