In news:7abvu8F1ublh4U1@mid.individual.net,
olfart typed on Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:26:00 -0400:
> PS...have been running WIN7 RC on my old Dell C610 with VG results
> and as soon as I can scare up the drivers I'm going to try it on the
> 701

Something I should try as well. <grin>

--
Bill
Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

In news:5p6dnbbPaYDem9zXnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com ,
AJL typed on Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:43:55 -0700:
>> AJL typed on Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:20:57 -0700:
>
>>> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:
>
>>> That is a problem with very small SSD netbooks. They pretty much are
>>> limited to Linux. And the general public doesn't seem to care much
>>> for Linux so I imagine that they will go the way of the Palm
>>> Pilot... ;)
>
>> Windows 2000 SP4 only needs 700MB and runs very well on netbooks.
>
> Only Linux and XP are currently available on *new* netbooks.

Yeah well. At least Microsoft can't kill off XP as long as they are
still putting them on netbooks, eh?

>> At least on the Asus netbooks anyway.
>
> What the 'general public' wants is what's usually for sale.
> Indications are they don't like netbooks with Linux or very small
> screens. So like my Palm TX, this Linux powered 7" screened 2G SSDed
> EeePC 2GSurf is probably the last of it's kind... :(
>
>> Still lots of new copies of Windows 2000 being sold on eBay too.
>
> Great for us hobby people but not much help for Asus's bottom line...
> ;)

I dunno... as I hear a lot of people buying netbooks and they don't care
what is on them and they either install some version of Linux or Windows
anyway. Not a lot, but like 10 to 20% anyway.

I really think your 2G Surf would be very nice with Windows 2000 SP4
myself. And if I had one, that is what I would put on it. And those 2G
Surf models are still going for way over 100 bucks on eBay used. So I
think they are still very useful for many out there.

And many of the newer netbooks with SSDs only come with MLC SSD (the
cheap SSD version). And the more expensive SLC SSD that lasts 10 times
longer are disappearing very quickly. And I believe ones like yours are
going to be worth a lot once the fallout happens with MLC SSDs. <grin>

--
Bill
Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

"BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
news:h1u08s$7rg$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> In news:7abvu8F1ublh4U1@mid.individual.net,
> olfart typed on Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:26:00 -0400:
>> PS...have been running WIN7 RC on my old Dell C610 with VG results
>> and as soon as I can scare up the drivers I'm going to try it on the
>> 701
>
> Something I should try as well. <grin>
>
> --
> Bill
> Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
> Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
>

problem is that Win7 needs about 8gb of HD space for all it's temp files
during install and finishes out around 4.5-5gb. Going to try to load it on a
bootable flash drive or card when I get some time.

"BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
news:h1u070$7k1$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> In news:7abvr3F1uv4doU1@mid.individual.net,
> olfart typed on Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:24:19 -0400:
>> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
>> news:h1qdba$k2r$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> In news:9m2045d9g4dv8c2r3ae6pgtlo4mevfjfg0@4ax.com,
>>> AJL typed on Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:20:57 -0700:
>>>> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 4G netbooks can't even handle XP with SP3.
>>>>
>>>> That is a problem with very small SSD netbooks. They pretty much are
>>>> limited to Linux. And the general public doesn't seem to care much
>>>> for Linux so I imagine that they will go the way of the Palm
>>>> Pilot... ;)
>>>
>>> Naw... Windows 2000 SP4 only needs 700MB and runs very well on
>>> netbooks. At least on the Asus netbooks anyway. Still lots of new
>>> copies of Windows 2000 being sold on eBay too.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bill
>>> Windows 2000 SP4 (5.00.2195)
>>> Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
>>
>> Yes, the eeePC701 4gb 2g Ram 16g SDHC Card does very well with Win
>> 2000, but there are several programs I use which don't play well with
>> W2000 so I still run the full version of XP SP3 with all updates and
>> the 701 does very well with it.
>
> Yes this is true. I can use either myself. Although I had to stop using
> Maxthon 1.5.6 with XP SP3. It causes webpages to load so slowly.
>
>> No, I don't do Photoshop or Video editing on it, but I have most
>> common programs installed plus garmin GPS and HAVA Video streaming
>> and am using approx 2.4gb of the 4gb SSD.
>
> That is what I remember XP only using of a 4GB SSD. But I checked again
> and the OEM version of XP for Asus only has 400MB free. I can delete Works
> v9 and the Live stuff to get about 800MB free, but still not a lot and not
> enough to install SP3. I should grab my XP install disks and see what size
> they install at.
>
>> Plenty of room on the 16gb SDHC for large files and I have put
>> several large programs(GPS) on the card with no noticable performance
>> loss. Of course I can still plug in a second 16gb card via USB card
>> reader for movies, etc. If I need to use some of the larger programs
>> on my main computer I just connect up to it via www.logmein.com and
>> run anything I want remotely from anywhere I have internet access.
>
> I have three 16GB now. Very nice for extra storage.
>
>> I don't use a swap file or hibernate to save hd space and this has
>> never caused my performance to suffer....<wink><grin> and a big (:>)
>
> Very good idea. <big grin>
>
> --
> Bill
> Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
> Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
>
>
I use an old version of Works...made for Win95 and it gets the job done
without all the xtra crap. Don't remember how much space it uses, but I know
it's smaller than V9. Another space waster is system restore...which I don't
use either. Also....are you putting your temp files and My Documents onto
your SDHC Card? And I'm sure you delete all the hotfix and SP3 uninstall
files. If you dig s\aroung ther is alot that can be deleted or transferred
off of Drive C and still have a pretty good running system.

In news:7afhgtF1vabn4U1@mid.individual.net,
olfart typed on Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:44:28 -0400:
> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
> news:h1u08s$7rg$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In news:7abvu8F1ublh4U1@mid.individual.net,
>> olfart typed on Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:26:00 -0400:
>>> PS...have been running WIN7 RC on my old Dell C610 with VG results
>>> and as soon as I can scare up the drivers I'm going to try it on the
>>> 701
>>
>> Something I should try as well. <grin>
>>
>> Bill
>
> problem is that Win7 needs about 8gb of HD space for all it's temp
> files during install and finishes out around 4.5-5gb. Going to try to
> load it on a bootable flash drive or card when I get some time.

Oh Windows (I don't know about W7) can't boot from a flash or an USB
(not without registry hacks anyway). I have two 8G machines, so if it
doesn't need more I should be ok. I'm also thinking about buying just to
play around with a 16G MLC SSD anyway. So that should be plenty.

--
Bill
Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

In news:7afi0cF1v1b4dU1@mid.individual.net,
olfart typed on Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:52:44 -0400:
> I use an old version of Works...made for Win95 and it gets the job
> done without all the xtra crap. Don't remember how much space it
> uses, but I know it's smaller than V9.

Yes I should still have the install disks for v2, v3, and v4.x. I
remember they were small like only 20MB. One feature Microsoft never
added was macros. I think they did this on purpose (as that is the only
reason I use Office more). There is nothing in later versions I want or
need. My Gateway laptops came with v8 I think, but they are no longer on
them. Add/Remove claims it is eating 400MB for v9. But if you remove it,
it is only less than 200MB of extra space is recovered.

> Another space waster is system restore...which I don't use either.

Oh yes. System Restore is okay if you have the room. But backups are far
better anyway. And the neat thing about having a 4G system is that it
fits on a single DVD backup. <grin>

Another waste is the SoftwareDistribution folder under Windows 2000
anyway. Under XP, I never seen a lot in there. Under Windows 2000, it
has over 500MB. If you bypass all of the safeties (booting from Linux,
BartPE, or WinPE), you can delete it all. But some are recreated when
you reboot, but not a lot. Under 10MB from what I recall.

> Also....are you putting your temp files and My Documents onto your
> SDHC Card?

Yes and temps are put into a 512MB RAMDisk. Way too much for 99% of the
time. But I am not using the extra RAM for anything else anyway.

> And I'm sure you delete all the hotfix and SP3 uninstall files. If you
> dig s\aroung ther is alot that can be deleted or transferred off of
> Drive C and still have a pretty good running system.

Yes, but that OEM version of XP for EeePC is very bloated and I can't
find out why so far. I believe uninstall Works v9 and all of the Windows
Live stuff doesn't really all come off is my guess. <sigh>

--
Bill
Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

"BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:

>a lot of people buying netbooks and they don't care what is on them

The return rate for Linux netbooks is far higher than XP. So the
public may not care when they buy them, but they apparently care after
they try to use them.

>many of the newer netbooks with SSDs only come with MLC SSD

Eee PCs with more than 4GB (900, 901, 1000) actually come with two
different SSDs, with the first 4GB on one chip and the remaining
storage on a slower, higher-capacity *MLC* chip...

>I believe ones like yours (Eee PC 2G Surf) are going to be worth
>a lot once the fallout happens with MLC SSDs. <grin>

Over the years I've bought many new computers. I've never yet had one
increase in value, in fact they all drastically decreased in value
after just a few years. I feel certain that my 2G Surf will continue
on in this glorious technological tradition that makes me enjoy going
broke... ;)

In news:s4r545t04i68feoj5q3k6ks7k01ptd7tum@4ax.com,
AJL typed on Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:16:36 -0700:
> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:
>
>> a lot of people buying netbooks and they don't care what is on them
>
> The return rate for Linux netbooks is far higher than XP. So the
> public may not care when they buy them, but they apparently care after
> they try to use them.

That is interesting. I didn't know that.

>> many of the newer netbooks with SSDs only come with MLC SSD
>
> Eee PCs with more than 4GB (900, 901, 1000) actually come with two
> different SSDs, with the first 4GB on one chip and the remaining
> storage on a slower, higher-capacity *MLC* chip...

Well those newer ones like the 701SD that comes with 8GB is said to be
just using a MLC SSD. Yes those other models generally use a SLC as the
master and a MLC as the slave. Although this is quickly changing. MLC
are cheaper and technology are making them very fast in the reading and
writing department. And SLC are getting harder and harder to find.
Worse, they are not marking them much anymore that they are the MLC
type. I had to find a part number decoder to know whether a SSD is a SLC
or a MLC type.

>> I believe ones like yours (Eee PC 2G Surf) are going to be worth
>> a lot once the fallout happens with MLC SSDs. <grin>
>
> Over the years I've bought many new computers. I've never yet had one
> increase in value, in fact they all drastically decreased in value
> after just a few years. I feel certain that my 2G Surf will continue
> on in this glorious technological tradition that makes me enjoy going
> broke... ;)

I believe the IBM 5100 gets more than it cost back in the 70's. My
Commodore SX64 (first color luggable with a 5 inch screen) I bought
refurbished for $350 back in '86 or '87. Today they still sell for $350
on eBay. I didn't use mine for much except to burn EPROMs from time to
time. So it is still in great shape. They have one on eBay right now
with a dead keyboard for 200 bucks (item #110406858292). It probably has
a bad MOS 6522 I/O chip. They blow so easy from static electricity.
There could be other things wrong with it too.

Here is a "Vintage Epson CX 20 Acoustic Modem for HX 20 and PX 8"
(#170330186605) for 50 bucks. I have one of these too. That is what they
cost new. And this one is untested. See there are old computers and
computer parts worth more than they cost new back then. Just wait until
SLC SSD becomes rarer. <grin>

--
Bill
Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

BillW50 wrote:
> In news:s4r545t04i68feoj5q3k6ks7k01ptd7tum@4ax.com,
> AJL typed on Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:16:36 -0700:
>> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:
>>
>>> a lot of people buying netbooks and they don't care what is on them
>> The return rate for Linux netbooks is far higher than XP. So the
>> public may not care when they buy them, but they apparently care after
>> they try to use them.
>
> That is interesting. I didn't know that.
>
>>> many of the newer netbooks with SSDs only come with MLC SSD
>> Eee PCs with more than 4GB (900, 901, 1000) actually come with two
>> different SSDs, with the first 4GB on one chip and the remaining
>> storage on a slower, higher-capacity *MLC* chip...
>
> Well those newer ones like the 701SD that comes with 8GB is said to be
> just using a MLC SSD. Yes those other models generally use a SLC as the
> master and a MLC as the slave. Although this is quickly changing. MLC
> are cheaper and technology are making them very fast in the reading and
> writing department. And SLC are getting harder and harder to find.
> Worse, they are not marking them much anymore that they are the MLC
> type. I had to find a part number decoder to know whether a SSD is a SLC
> or a MLC type.
>
>>> I believe ones like yours (Eee PC 2G Surf) are going to be worth
>>> a lot once the fallout happens with MLC SSDs. <grin>
>> Over the years I've bought many new computers. I've never yet had one
>> increase in value, in fact they all drastically decreased in value
>> after just a few years. I feel certain that my 2G Surf will continue
>> on in this glorious technological tradition that makes me enjoy going
>> broke... ;)
>
> I believe the IBM 5100 gets more than it cost back in the 70's. My
> Commodore SX64 (first color luggable with a 5 inch screen) I bought
> refurbished for $350 back in '86 or '87. Today they still sell for $350
> on eBay. I didn't use mine for much except to burn EPROMs from time to
> time. So it is still in great shape. They have one on eBay right now
> with a dead keyboard for 200 bucks (item #110406858292). It probably has
> a bad MOS 6522 I/O chip. They blow so easy from static electricity.
> There could be other things wrong with it too.
>
> Here is a "Vintage Epson CX 20 Acoustic Modem for HX 20 and PX 8"
> (#170330186605) for 50 bucks. I have one of these too. That is what they
> cost new. And this one is untested. See there are old computers and
> computer parts worth more than they cost new back then. Just wait until
> SLC SSD becomes rarer. <grin>
>
Made a small fortune off of NIB legacy IBM server parts last year.

In news:7afhgtF1vabn4U1@mid.individual.net,
olfart typed on Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:44:28 -0400:
> problem is that Win7 needs about 8gb of HD space for all it's temp
> files during install and finishes out around 4.5-5gb...

Is there a special version for netbooks? As this one requires 16GB of
free disk space.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/win.../download.aspx

--
Bill
Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC

"BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:

>My Commodore SX64... they still sell for $350

Would that be the antique or hobbyist computer market? Like old
obsolete cars *some* certainly do increase in value.

>They have one on eBay right now with a dead keyboard for 200 bucks...

And that would be the parts market? To carry the analogy forward, one
of my favorite places as a kid was the auto junkyard. They made a
fortune on junk parts.

>See there are old computers and computer parts worth more than
>they cost new back then.

Yes I agree there are *some* that increase in value. But I think that
if you visit the recycle yard in most any town and see the piles of
old computers you will agree that *most*, like 99.99999% drop in
value... ;)

>Just wait until SLC SSD becomes rarer. <grin>

Ok, I'll sell you my 2G Surf with the SLC SSD for a measly $1K
(postpaid). Think of the profit you will make in say 30 years??

"BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
news:h20c92$h74$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> In news:7afhgtF1vabn4U1@mid.individual.net,
> olfart typed on Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:44:28 -0400:
>> problem is that Win7 needs about 8gb of HD space for all it's temp
>> files during install and finishes out around 4.5-5gb...
>
> Is there a special version for netbooks? As this one requires 16GB of free
> disk space.
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/win.../download.aspx
>
> --
> Bill
> Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
> Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
>

I should have been a little more specific about Win7. I'm just starting to
get into it to the point where I can start to chop some fat. On my homebuilt
3.2gb 4gb RAM box my win 7 basic installation is about 9.6gb. There is a
2,2gb page file, 1.6 hibernate file and a .5gb file called backup....which i
assume is system restore. Getting rid of these could knock it down to about
5.4gb. And I'm sure there are other files I could trim once I have time to
fool with it. The 8gb and 4.5-5gb figures are some I read somewhere and I'm
using them for a target. The 8gb for installation(temp) files might be
closer to 10 to 14 gb depending on who you talk to. I also installed it on
an old Dell C610 laptop and without any modifcations yet....except running
in best performance mode to cut down the eye candy....and it reuns very
well.
Haven't had a chance to try out alot of the features yet, but so far I
really like it....as opposed to Vista...which I now use as an expensive
coaster(:>). Some of the features like email, etc are left out of the basic
install and you can d/l them if you wish or use your own progs.
Am into some other home projects right now, but plan to get back on Win7 in
a few weeks.

In news:7ahuveF1vi97dU1@mid.individual.net,
olfart typed on Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:46:13 -0400:
> I should have been a little more specific about Win7. I'm just
> starting to get into it to the point where I can start to chop some
> fat. On my homebuilt 3.2gb 4gb RAM box my win 7 basic installation is
> about 9.6gb. There
> is a 2,2gb page file, 1.6 hibernate file and a .5gb file called
> backup....which i assume is system restore. Getting rid of these
> could knock it down to about 5.4gb. And I'm sure there are other files
> I could trim once I have
> time to fool with it. The 8gb and 4.5-5gb figures are some I read
> somewhere and I'm using them for a target. The 8gb for
> installation(temp) files might be closer to 10 to 14 gb depending on
> who you talk to. I also installed it on an old Dell C610 laptop and
> without any modifcations yet....except running in best performance
> mode to cut down the eye candy....and it reuns very well.
> Haven't had a chance to try out alot of the features yet, but so far I
> really like it....as opposed to Vista...which I now use as an
> expensive coaster(:>). Some of the features like email, etc are left
> out of the basic install and you can d/l them if you wish or use your
> own progs. Am into some other home projects right now, but plan to get
> back on
> Win7 in a few weeks.

Oh! It sounds like I should order a cheap 16GB MLC SSD, install, trim,
and image. Then throw on a 8G SLC SSD.

--
Bill
Windows XP Home SP3 (5.1.2600)
Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC