What would be a better operating system for this almost-retro PC?

[Eudimorphodon]

For a Pentium 4 era computer a SATA, MSATA or M.2->PATA adapter would be a more apropos choice than a CF card for flash storage, unless you’re running some kind of embedded environment.

AROS in particular isn’t really my cup of tea, but I would agree broadly that “something off the beaten path” is frankly about the only thing I would recommend for a machine like this. AROS, Haiku, Kolibri… eh, if you really want a laugh wrap your head in tinfoil and fire up TempleOS.

EDIT: scratch TempleOS unless it’s a 64 bit Pentium 4, I guess. Maybe Plan9?

 

[hunterjwizzard]

AROS http://www.aros.org/ would be my first pick. It is the Amiga desktop environment for more modern x86 systems. It is very well executed IMHO.

This is a definite winner. Downloading this immediately. I love this forum.

I've got NT4, 2K and XP installed on CFs. Not fast, but usable, once it gets booted up. However, be aware that the XP installer doesn't like CFs that identify as "removable". And even if you get it installed, it won't put the swap file on CF. However, there are a couple of hacks to get around that.

That may be the problem. There's no other drive on the system.

For a Pentium 4 era computer a SATA, MSATA or M.2->PATA adapter would be a more apropos choice than a CF card for flash storage, unless you’re running some kind of embedded environment.

I chose the CF card primarily for sh*ts, with the probable potential for giggles. I'm going to put more RAM in the system and increase the pagefile, if its still twitchy I'll try a SATA drive. Got those in ever-lasting supply.

eh, if you really want a laugh wrap your head in tinfoil and fire up TempleOS.

...I have the ISOs in my collection. Madness lies down this path. At least I won't have to plan my weekend.

 

[Eudimorphodon]

Have fun and all that, I guess. Whatever floats your boat, anyway.

A few years ago I slapped lightweight Ubuntu (Either Xubuntu or Lubuntu, I forget, they’re practically the same) on what I remembered as a really nice little 3.something GHz Pentium 4 Dell that was my office computer from the 2005-2007-ish era thinking it ram so well back then, it’s gotta still be useful for something today.

I was wrong.

The takeaway I got from that was that these machines are neither old enough to be interesting or new enough to be good for anything but chocking the wheels on a cement trailer, but, sure, maybe if you have the correct expectations you’ll come away from it with different results. Good luck.

 

[hunterjwizzard]

My logic is the system shouldn't be any worse for win98SE than my PIII. I was primarily interested in the other features of the motherboard besides exactly what chip it takes. Onboard LAN, lots of PCI slots, onboard SATA, and dual-channel DDR RAM. All things I thought coupled with a fast clock speed would make Windows 98 perform better than my 933mhz PIII. Don't know why it behaved pourly.

Of course the chief goal of this machine is to use up excess parts and give me something to do that doesn't cost money. So from that perspective, this project is going GREAT!

lol

 

[Caluser2000]

My logic is the system shouldn't be any worse for win98SE than my PIII. I was primarily interested in the other features of the motherboard besides exactly what chip it takes. Onboard LAN, lots of PCI slots, onboard SATA, and dual-channel DDR RAM. All things I thought coupled with a fast clock speed would make Windows 98 perform better than my 933mhz PIII. Don't know why it behaved pourly.

Of course the chief goal of this machine is to use up excess parts and give me something to do that doesn't cost money. So from that perspective, this project is going GREAT!

lol

That saves money for other projects

 

[hunterjwizzard]

That saves money for other projects

That's the idea That's also how I got to this area in the first place. I've always been a hardware nut and enjoyed having older computers. Around 17 years ago I realized the building was more fun than having something cutting-edge, and that obsolete hardware cost a fraction of what was brand new. Flash forward to today and I have lots of stuff that was simply "obsolete" when I bought it. Now at least some of it is "vintage", and here we are.

 

[Caluser2000]

That's the idea That's also how I got to this area in the first place. I've always been a hardware nut and enjoyed having older computers. Around 17 years ago I realized the building was more fun than having something cutting-edge, and that obsolete hardware cost a fraction of what was brand new. Flash forward to today and I have lots of stuff that was simply "obsolete" when I bought it. Now at least some of it is "vintage", and here we are.

I got most of my ye odle hardware and software in the early to mid 2000s which were mainly early to mid x86 and Acorn stuff. Had a hiatus on purchasing stuff until around 6 months ago and have almost doubled my hoard. Quite a lot off Apple G4x and early to mid 2010 Apple x86 stuff. With a few odds and sods like Ibm ppc AIX server, Amiga 600 upgrade hardware(roms and hdd/ssd stuff) as well as software.

I certainly wasn't a follower of fashion and using systems given to me by freinds,family or other contact. Basically a rest home for old computers. Only ever had one brand spanking new computer in my entire life.

 

[hunterjwizzard]

My friends stopped having desktops, so my supplies of old computers have dwindled to nothing. If I'd simply kept most of the hardware I had years ago, I would be so much happier. I used to have a real nice compact 486 that I miss. And some good solid ATX towers that are long gone. Towers are the hardest part now.

 

[seaken]

I wasn't sure what you wanted to do if you were trying to do gaming. But then you said:

"Of course the chief goal of this machine is to use up excess parts and give me something to do that doesn't cost money. So from that perspective, this project is going GREAT!"

In that case I wholly recommend Linux, or BSD. Lots of stuff to play with that doesn't cost money.

I have several P4's where I run Linux. I usually use a Debian derivative like MX or antiX or Linux Mint Debian Edition.

On my best P4, a 3.2Ghz with Hyper Threading, and 4GB or RAM, I run MX-23 Xfce, Q4OS Plasma KDE, and openSuse Tumbleweed Xfce, along with the original Windows XP SP3.

On my IBM ThinkCentre P4 2.8Gz with 2Gb RAM I run MX21, antiX21, Mint Debian Edition w/ Cinnamon, Q4OS Trinity Centaurus 3.14, Bunsenlabs, Bhodi, Sparky, Debian 11, Slackware, MX21 Fluxbox, and the original Windows XP SP3.

I have an original P4 Willamette 1.7Ghz with 512Mb of SDRAM. That system definitely runs best with antiX or MX Fluxbox. Those distros are meant for older machines with limited resources. Debian and Slackware also run but not as well suited as antiX for this equipment.

DOS games can run in DOSBOX under Linux. I've also used VirtualBox to install DOS or Windows. Linux can be a lot of fun for an experimenter. And it's free. And modern, current.

Seaken

 

[1ST1]

Windows XP is "period correct" for your system. Windows 2000 is also a good choice and will run a bit better with only 512MB RAM.

The NT line is always going to be more stable than 9x, where one buggy VXD can take down everything.

Yes, but 512 kB is not enough to be happy for XP SP3.

Windows 7 - 32 bits. Better and faster than XP and still able to handle the older 16-bits programs like Turbo Pascal.

Should be Ok when using 4 MB RAM. Also Vista could be a good choice. Maybe even 8/8.1. But, enhance RAM to 4 MB, and you are happy.

The Pentium 4 3.2 GHz should be toooo fast for Win 98/SE/ME.

 

[lowen]

WindowsXP is period-correct for a 3.2GHz P4, but you'll want more RAM. Windows 7/32bit will run in 1GB on a P4; $dayjob has some instrument controllers running on IEI ROCKY-6614 PICMIG cards in passive backplanes with 3.4GHz LGA775 P4's that are Win7/32 bit, and while they aren't fast they work, interfacing with a custom ISA card. They were shipped with XP, though. Win7/32bit feels faster, but a special ioport driver is required that the instrument manufacturer provided.

One has 1GB and the others have 1.5 or 2GB, which doesn't make a huge difference. I would rather have a 2.x GHz Core2 than a 3.4GHz P4 any day of the week, but the ISA card says otherwise, with too many I/O port blocks to work with most PCI to ISA bridges, except the one on the IEI ROCKY-6614 card....

 

[Caluser2000]

Yes, but 512 kB is not enough to be happy for XP SP3.

Should be Ok when using 4 MB RAM. Also Vista could be a good choice. Maybe even 8/8.1. But, enhance RAM to 4 MB, and you are happy.

The Pentium 4 3.2 GHz should be toooo fast for Win 98/SE/ME.

4megs wow that's a lot!

 

[1ST1]

Oh, yes.... 4 GB would be better.