My Name is Uzman,I want to ask the minimum(complete)hardware requirement
Posted via CNET Help.com
Posted via CNET Help.com
VapourSig 1.1 has been postponed indefinitely
>> My Name is Uzman,I want to ask the minimum(complete)hardware requirement
>> for WindowsNT,95,98,Dos,Linex.
>For DOS: a computer.
>For Linux: a computer with at least a 386 CPU and 8 mb RAM (should
>work with less, but more difficult).
>For Windowsxx: the fastest, most expensive machine you can find in the
>shop is the minimum required machine. For smooth running you will
>always need next year's hardware..
> >> My Name is Uzman,I want to ask the minimum(complete)hardware requirement
> >> for WindowsNT,95,98,Dos,Linex.
> >For DOS: a computer.
> >For Linux: a computer with at least a 386 CPU and 8 mb RAM (should
> >work with less, but more difficult).
> >For Windowsxx: the fastest, most expensive machine you can find in the
> >shop is the minimum required machine. For smooth running you will
> >always need next year's hardware..
> Same for linux if you intend to run the latest and gratest x-windows
> application, web browsing, and multimedia. Good old CLI programs are
> much more modest in memory requirements.
> My Name is Uzman,I want to ask the minimum(complete)hardware requirement
> for WindowsNT,95,98,Dos,Linex.
> Posted via CNET Help.com
In general, DOS will run on 8088, 8086s and 80x86s. Most versions
of DOS (free dos, dr dos, msdos3.3, msdos6.22, etc.) will fit entirely
on 1-3 floppies (a few more if you include lots of extra utilities),
will run / boot /boot-and-run from floppy, and will take up 1-20 MB on
hard disk (depending on whether you include source code, how many
utilities, etc.). They will execute happily in 1 MB RAM, but most apps
want as much of the 640KB of "low memory" that they can get.
Win95 will definitely run in 4 MB RAM, and might run in 2 MB or
less (it is primarily DOS anyway)...but many apps benefit from 8 MB
RAM. It came out in the era of 80386s, and I THINK it needs an 80386
(but am not sure). I am not sure of the hard disk space used, but I
think it is around 100 MB. It is slowish on a 486, though.
Win98 wants more RAM (I think it calls for 32 MB), not sure about
80x86s. I think it occupies more like 200 MB disk space. It is more
sluggish on a 486 than win95.
WinNT I have only used briefly. Win NT crawls on a 486, and
probably requires 32BM+ RAM. I'd estimate 200 MB on hard disk.
Linux requires an 80386 (or other processor to which it has been
ported). Most major distributions require ~100 MB. But, again, you can
install a very basic linux on a floppy and run without a hard drive.
You cannot DO much with it though without applications that require
considerably more room. You want at least an 486 to do much in X (I am
happy with X on a 486....many find it too slow....and of course that
depends somewhat on the apps you are using). A "full" distribution with
X windows and many of the basic unix utilities people EXPECT (like less)
runs at least 200 MB...up to 600 to 700 with common basic apps (like an
office suite and a web server aboard, but not one of every program that
is available for the unix world). The typical kernel uses 5 MB, and
running with less takes a specialty distribution. I'd say most users
want 8MB to run console mode, and 16 or so for X (more if you have
memory hungry apps).
My recommendations (based on machine capability, not OS
wonderfulness) would be:
8088-80286 DR DOS or Free DOS variant. (or Minix)
80386 console Linux or above DOS
80486, 8+MB RAM console-(16MB+RAM) X Linux or (4+MB RAM) Win95 or DR
80586+, 32 MB+ RAM any listed OS.
Hope that helps.
< 1K Download
>You mean Windows 3.1 here.
>Windows 95 should run on 16M and may run sluggishly on 8M.
Matt G / Dances With Crows \###| You have me mixed up with more
There is no Darkness in Eternity \##| creative ways of being stupid?
But only Light too dim for us to see \#| Beer is a vegetable. WinNT
(Unless, of course, you're working with NT)\| is the study of cool. --MegaHAL
I have a 4.3 gig hard disk in my office which I split into 3
partitions. The rough layout of the partitions are in this manner:
1 Primary partition assigned to Windows 95 C Drive 2 Gig
partition 2 Gig
1 Logical partition assigned to Windows NT D Drive 1 1 Gig
1 Logical partition reserved for Linux E Drive 1 1
According to above, I have already installed Windows 95 and Windows
NT. After booting up from linux boot and root disk, I run fdisk and did
a check on my partition table. What I saw was only the primary partition
and the extended partition but no logical partitions was shown. Since it
did not show me the logical drives, I couldn't select anything for my
linux native or linux swap. I'm wondering if there's a way to get linux
fdisk to show me the logical drives so that I can install Linux to it.
Anyway, if any of you has experienced installing all 3 Operating
Systems on the same hard disk, can you tell me how to work around this
or tell me how to get it done so that I can have all 3 OS installed on
the same hard disk.
8 September 1998