How mcuh can the computer change and the old harddrives stilll work?

On Tuesday, February 25, 2014 10:26:05 PM UTC-5, Paul wrote:
micky wrote:

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:40:25 -0500, wrote:



If it has the same motherboard and video card it will boot and run -

may need new drivers for sound or network.

Even a different motherboard will likely boot OK. The odd video card

can make the hard-drive unbootable - Get another Dimension 4400 and

you have better than a 95% chance it will boot and run.



Wih all the helpful answers, it's hard to know whom to reply to.



Paul raises a lot of issues, some of which I havent' an answer for yet

but I do have a general answer.





Yes, changing the computer that surrounds the hard drives, from one Dell

Dimension 4400 to another, went as smooth as silk,



It didn't say I needed a single new driver and didn't say a word about

Windows reactivation.



It was like nothing had changed. It took about an hour and 10 minutes

including the mistake I made that I describe below. But also including

the time to find the right extension cord and 3-prong adapters to plug

in the computer and the thin screen monitor I brought over. and to get a

banana and things like that.



It still has the Network card it came with, and it wasn't connected in

place when I left, so we hadn't tested on the Internet when I was there

(Sunday) but she must have tried it by now and if it didn't work I would

have heard about it. (The seller gave my friend his number and said

to call him if there were any problems. He was Craigslist and only

asked 40 dollars (compared to 50 that the Ebay guy did) )



And she had a two USB, two Firewire card that came with the computer,

but we didn't put that back in and left the four USB jack the new

computer had. I don't know anyone who uses Firewire, so maybe she's

better off with four more USB ports than just two??







Big question. She had two memory slots only with 512M each. The new

computer was advertised at 1.5 Gig and indeed when I looked at System

Properties / General, that's what it said.



I thought no one made 750 meg DDR memory sticks, and that if one used

1Meg and 512K sticks in the same pair, it wouldnt' work right. Like

maybe it would only work as well as 1G???. But fwiw it says 1.5 gig.









I made one mistake for sure. When I looked inside the harddrives while

they were in the non-working computer, I didn't notice that both had

windows. I thought only one did and if I connected them backwards

Windows would not start. And then Sunday, even though I concentrated, I

didnt' concentrate well enough and I connected the wrong drive as the C:

drive, maybe. Neither my friend nor I could tell for sure that we had

done this. Because neither of us had seen the computer start up, we

didn't know what the desktop looked like. We were startled because it

had 3 logon options, the woman, her son, and guest. My XP never shows

Guest, and my friend uses a Mac 99% of the time.



Plus she uses the mouse with left-handed turned on, and sometimes it

seemed to be on and sometimes not.



It only took 5 minutes or less to reverse the harddrives and the new

setup also included Guest. And when she got home late that night, she

told my friend (her tenant in the same house) that indeed, it did have

Guest.



We tried to figure out which is the more newly used partition by looking

at her email, in Outlook, but whichever way the drives were, the email

(in and out and and drafts etc.) was the same!!! Is that because...

well her son who lives in the next city maintains her computer much of

the time and he might have started her over in a new harddrive, but

maybe windows automatically pointed to the Outlook that was already

installed? Or maybe he manually pointed to it, so he woudln't have to

copy or move the data? Anyhow it was confusing.



I think it was Skype that decided it. I know she uses Skype once in a

while now and it wasn't in the first version of Windows.



This mistake of mine must have taken at least 15 minutes to check out,

plus 5 minutes to switch the drives.







It sounds like you did OK.



While it's possible to move file pointers to stuff (such that both

OS installations point to the same data files), let's hope it really

isn't set up that way :-)



You would want to examine the boot.ini file, to be sure

what the boot menu is pointing to. Just to verify there

isn't some trickery in there. You'd want to verify

that both disks had OSes, both were set up to get

kicked into action from the boot menu and so on.



Disk Management applies labels to the partitions, and what roles

they can play. And can give some hints as to how the disks

are related to one another.



*******



http://support.dell.com/support/syst...4400/specs.htm



It says 2 x 512MB max there.



The datasheet for 845 (DDR version) says it accepts 2x1GB sticks.

The config you have currently, could then be 512MB + 1024MB as

two different sticks. There's no need to match the capacities,

since the 845 is a single memory bus, and can accept mixed

DIMMs without changing the performance level due to mixing.

On dual channel boards (ones after the 845 era), that's

when you become more interested in channel matching.



See section 5.2.2 on PDF page 109... The 1GB DIMM would need

to have 16 chips on it, to work properly (512Mbit tech, under

the x8 column)



http://www.intel.com/content/dam/doc...-datasheet.pdf



In future, if you want confirmation of memory types,

you can carry a no-install version of CPUZ with you,

and use that to list the SPD contents on each DIMM.

That would have told you one is 1GB and the other 512MB.



http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html



In this picture, CPUZ shows "Slot #1" and the

kind of memory installed in it. You use the pull-down

menu where it says "Slot #1", to select the other slots

as desired.



http://www.cpuid.com/medias/images/e...es-cpuz-05.jpg



Finding a 1GB stick of RAM in there, means the previous

owner ignored the "Dell advice".



Paul

"Dell advice" as printed in their specs very often lagged (lags) behind technology introduced after the advice went to print. And they don't take extra time to update it. Best to look up the specs for the chipsets used in Dell boxes. The Intel 845 chipset variants are all capable of handling 2GB of the right type of memory... Ben Myers

On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 12:03:50 -0800 (PST), Ben Myers
wrote:


"Dell advice" as printed in their specs very often lagged (lags) behind tec=
hnology introduced after the advice went to print. And they don't take ext=
ra time to update it. Best to look up the specs for the chipsets used in D=
ell boxes. The Intel 845 chipset variants are all capable of handling 2GB =
of the right type of memory... Ben Myers

Speaking of chipsets, it would have been nice to find a newer model
computer, rather than get the same ol' thing.

But am I correct in guessing that chipsets only stay current for a
couple years, and any computer 3 years newer or more would be using a
different chipset anyhow?

It would take a lof googling and reading to find a different model
computer that still used the same chipset, Especially since I'm not on
anyone's mailing list and no one sends me lists of what brands and
models use what chipset. It's probably not worth the effort,
right, since it won't be more than 1, 2 years newer??

On Sunday, March 2, 2014 11:26:08 PM UTC-5, micky wrote:
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 12:03:50 -0800 (PST), Ben Myers

wrote:





"Dell advice" as printed in their specs very often lagged (lags) behind tec=

hnology introduced after the advice went to print. And they don't take ext=

ra time to update it. Best to look up the specs for the chipsets used in D=

ell boxes. The Intel 845 chipset variants are all capable of handling 2GB =

of the right type of memory... Ben Myers



Speaking of chipsets, it would have been nice to find a newer model

computer, rather than get the same ol' thing.



But am I correct in guessing that chipsets only stay current for a

couple years, and any computer 3 years newer or more would be using a

different chipset anyhow?



It would take a lof googling and reading to find a different model

computer that still used the same chipset, Especially since I'm not on

anyone's mailing list and no one sends me lists of what brands and

models use what chipset. It's probably not worth the effort,

right, since it won't be more than 1, 2 years newer??

Intel has followed an almost-yearly progression in its progression of ever improving chipsets. Possibly the one exception was the 845 chipset for earlier Socket 478 Pentium 4 motherboards. The 845 chipset lasted maybe 3 years. (Looking at Dell Pentium systems, the Dimension 4300, 4400, 4500 and 4550 and the wildly popular Dimension 2300/2400 all used the 845 chipset.) Intel got a lot of mileage out of the 845, so they had no motivation to improve it until later. Initial Socket 478 P4 systems ran with 1.5GHz CPUs and the last CPU chip fully compatible with the 845 was the 2.8GHz Celeron, nearly twice the speed.

Getting a system with a newer chipset, faster CPU, more memory etc would not work as a plug-compatible replacement. Instead, it would require a reinstall of Windows and all the other software, because Microsoft decreed it has to be that way... Ben Myers

On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 22:37:43 -0800 (PST), Ben Myers
wrote:

On Sunday, March 2, 2014 11:26:08 PM UTC-5, micky wrote:
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 12:03:50 -0800 (PST), Ben Myers

wrote:





"Dell advice" as printed in their specs very often lagged (lags) behind tec=

hnology introduced after the advice went to print. And they don't take ext=

ra time to update it. Best to look up the specs for the chipsets used in D=

ell boxes. The Intel 845 chipset variants are all capable of handling 2GB =

of the right type of memory... Ben Myers



Speaking of chipsets, it would have been nice to find a newer model

computer, rather than get the same ol' thing.



But am I correct in guessing that chipsets only stay current for a

couple years, and any computer 3 years newer or more would be using a

different chipset anyhow?



It would take a lof googling and reading to find a different model

computer that still used the same chipset, Especially since I'm not on

anyone's mailing list and no one sends me lists of what brands and

models use what chipset. It's probably not worth the effort,

right, since it won't be more than 1, 2 years newer??

Intel has followed an almost-yearly progression in its progression of ever improving chipsets. Possibly the one exception was the 845 chipset for earlier Socket 478 Pentium 4 motherboards. The 845 chipset lasted maybe 3 years. (Looking at Dell Pentium systems, the Dimension 4300, 4400, 4500 and 4550 and the wildly popular Dimension 2300/2400 all used the 845 chipset.) Intel got a lot of mileage out of the 845, so they had no motivation to improve it until later. Initial Socket 478 P4 systems ran with 1.5GHz CPUs and the last CPU chip fully compatible with the 845 was the 2.8GHz Celeron, nearly twice the speed.

Getting a system with a newer chipset, faster CPU, more memory etc would not work as a plug-compatible replacement. Instead, it would require a reinstall of Windows and all the other software, because Microsoft decreed it has to be that way... Ben Myers

Then I did the right thing. If I'm going to spend extra effort helping
her, it can be with some of the problems that she has every 3 or 6
months.

Thanks.

On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 22:37:43 -0800 (PST), Ben Myers
wrote:

On Sunday, March 2, 2014 11:26:08 PM UTC-5, micky wrote:
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 12:03:50 -0800 (PST), Ben Myers

wrote:





"Dell advice" as printed in their specs very often lagged (lags) behind tec=

hnology introduced after the advice went to print. And they don't take ext=

ra time to update it. Best to look up the specs for the chipsets used in D=

ell boxes. The Intel 845 chipset variants are all capable of handling 2GB =

of the right type of memory... Ben Myers



Speaking of chipsets, it would have been nice to find a newer model

computer, rather than get the same ol' thing.



But am I correct in guessing that chipsets only stay current for a

couple years, and any computer 3 years newer or more would be using a

different chipset anyhow?



It would take a lof googling and reading to find a different model

computer that still used the same chipset, Especially since I'm not on

anyone's mailing list and no one sends me lists of what brands and

models use what chipset. It's probably not worth the effort,

right, since it won't be more than 1, 2 years newer??

Intel has followed an almost-yearly progression in its progression of ever improving chipsets. Possibly the one exception was the 845 chipset for earlier Socket 478 Pentium 4 motherboards. The 845 chipset lasted maybe 3 years. (Looking at Dell Pentium systems, the Dimension 4300, 4400, 4500 and 4550 and the wildly popular Dimension 2300/2400 all used the 845 chipset.) Intel got a lot of mileage out of the 845, so they had no motivation to improve it until later. Initial Socket 478 P4 systems ran with 1.5GHz CPUs and the last CPU chip fully compatible with the 845 was the 2.8GHz Celeron, nearly twice the speed.

Getting a system with a newer chipset, faster CPU, more memory etc would not work as a plug-compatible replacement. Instead, it would require a reinstall of Windows and all the other software, because Microsoft decreed it has to be that way... Ben Myers
An upgrade install of microsoft windows XP is all that is generally
required - and in many cases not even that.The only times I have not
been able to do a motherboard upgrade is if the old motherboard was
running certain video drivers and failed without being able to :knock
them back" to generic VGA drivers first. Otherwise the systems boot
with errors - no sound, no network, sometimes no USB, etc and you need
to source and download all the required drivers and instal them to get
full functionality back. Reinstalling programs is usually not
required. The secret is, you need a "full install" windows disk, not
an OEM Image disk. A retail disk or a generic oem disk does the job.
Generic OEM USUALLY works with the provided key, while you need the
retail key to intall from a retail disk (generally speaking). A
service pack 3 upgrade disk generally works and accepts the original
authorization. (been doing this crap since before Windows 1)

On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 08:04:51 -0500, wrote:

An upgrade install of microsoft windows XP is all that is generally
required - and in many cases not even that.The only times I have not
been able to do a motherboard upgrade is if the old motherboard was
running certain video drivers and failed without being able to :knock
them back" to generic VGA drivers first. Otherwise the systems boot

So how do you knock them back? By setting the video to the lowest
screen resolution and the lowest color quality the current monitor has?

Or do you have to put in an old monitor and set it to the lowest values
it has?

with errors - no sound, no network, sometimes no USB, etc and you need
to source and download all the required drivers and instal them to get
full functionality back. Reinstalling programs is usually not
required. The secret is, you need a "full install" windows disk, not
an OEM Image disk. A retail disk or a generic oem disk does the job.
Generic OEM USUALLY works with the provided key, while you need the
retail key to intall from a retail disk (generally speaking). A
service pack 3 upgrade disk generally works and accepts the original
authorization. (been doing this crap since before Windows 1)

He's saying that's the only time it has failed...he couldn't get it to work!
When it does work you end up with a generic diver and update to the proper one.

On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 14:47:55 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 08:04:51 -0500, wrote:

An upgrade install of microsoft windows XP is all that is generally
required - and in many cases not even that.The only times I have not
been able to do a motherboard upgrade is if the old motherboard was
running certain video drivers and failed without being able to :knock
them back" to generic VGA drivers first. Otherwise the systems boot

So how do you knock them back? By setting the video to the lowest
screen resolution and the lowest color quality the current monitor has?
Nope - remove the video drivers completely from the device manager.
Then it defaults to plain vanilla VGA..Then pull the hard drive and
install on new motherboard.

If the video adapter is a CARD you can just move it to the new
motherboard and you have a 90% chance it will work - as long as the
new board has a compatible slot.

Or do you have to put in an old monitor and set it to the lowest values
it has?

with errors - no sound, no network, sometimes no USB, etc and you need
to source and download all the required drivers and instal them to get
full functionality back. Reinstalling programs is usually not
required. The secret is, you need a "full install" windows disk, not
an OEM Image disk. A retail disk or a generic oem disk does the job.
Generic OEM USUALLY works with the provided key, while you need the
retail key to intall from a retail disk (generally speaking). A
service pack 3 upgrade disk generally works and accepts the original
authorization. (been doing this crap since before Windows 1)

On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:58:12 -0800 (PST), Bob_Villa
wrote:

He's saying that's the only time it has failed...he couldn't get it to work!
When it does work you end up with a generic diver and update to the proper one.
Not what I said, exactly. What I said is when a motherboard with the
nasty video card fails to the point you cannot boot it to remove the
drivers, the upgrade is virtually impossible.

On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 18:09:10 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 14:47:55 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 08:04:51 -0500, wrote:

An upgrade install of microsoft windows XP is all that is generally
required - and in many cases not even that.The only times I have not
been able to do a motherboard upgrade is if the old motherboard was
running certain video drivers and failed without being able to :knock
them back" to generic VGA drivers first. Otherwise the systems boot

So how do you knock them back? By setting the video to the lowest
screen resolution and the lowest color quality the current monitor has?
Nope - remove the video drivers completely from the device manager.
Then it defaults to plain vanilla VGA.

Aaaaahaaah. That last line that I have ignored for years, "To uninstall
the driver (advanced)" I finally get it.

For the display adapter and the monitor.

.Then pull the hard drive and
install on new motherboard.

If the video adapter is a CARD you can just move it to the new
motherboard and you have a 90% chance it will work - as long as the
new board has a compatible slot.

Aha. Yeah, they're always coming up with new slots.



This fills in another hole in my understanding and may be very useful
too. Thanks.

Or do you have to put in an old monitor and set it to the lowest values
it has?

with errors - no sound, no network, sometimes no USB, etc and you need
to source and download all the required drivers and instal them to get
full functionality back. Reinstalling programs is usually not
required. The secret is, you need a "full install" windows disk, not
an OEM Image disk. A retail disk or a generic oem disk does the job.
Generic OEM USUALLY works with the provided key, while you need the
retail key to intall from a retail disk (generally speaking). A
service pack 3 upgrade disk generally works and accepts the original
authorization. (been doing this crap since before Windows 1)