A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 23rd 07, 03:38 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16
Default Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.

Hello everybody!
I have a friend with an old Pentium 1 desktop with windows 95 lying
around. I think that the processor is rated at 90 MHz and the system
has 16 MB of ram.
I was wondering if the computer is still powerful enough to be still
used to view .jpg images. The images do not have to be larger than
800x600 resolution.
I also have no idea about what graphics card the system has, but I
think that it definatley has 2 MB of onboard memory.
Otherwise I do not know anything else about the specs, and I would not
be able to provide additional information.
I was thinking of trying to get it to work with ACDSee 3.0. I tested
the program on my Windows XP machine, and it used about 10-12 MB of
ram when viewing .jpg's of these resolutions.
What are your thoughts on this? Can it be done?

Also I was wondering how many colors does Windows 98 support? Can it
go to 32-bit?

P.S. the computer was purchased around the year 1995, if this helps.

Any comments would be greatly appreciated!

  #2  
Old May 23rd 07, 05:20 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware
kony
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,416
Default Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.

On 22 May 2007 19:38:29 -0700,
wrote:

Hello everybody!
I have a friend with an old Pentium 1 desktop with windows 95 lying
around. I think that the processor is rated at 90 MHz and the system
has 16 MB of ram.
I was wondering if the computer is still powerful enough to be still
used to view .jpg images. The images do not have to be larger than
800x600 resolution.


Yes, though it's not the output display resolution that
would matter, it is the decompressed size of the image that
would need fit within real + virtual memory, meaning if they
were very large it could be a bit sluggish to display or
very very large, that it couldn't decode.

I also have no idea about what graphics card the system has, but I
think that it definatley has 2 MB of onboard memory.


That's enough for the desired 800 x 600 @ 24 bit output.


Otherwise I do not know anything else about the specs, and I would not
be able to provide additional information.
I was thinking of trying to get it to work with ACDSee 3.0. I tested
the program on my Windows XP machine, and it used about 10-12 MB of
ram when viewing .jpg's of these resolutions.
What are your thoughts on this? Can it be done?


ACDSee may be a bit heavy consumer of memory compared to
some old picture viewer but today I can't tell you what old
software is the lightest memory footprint. So you might
look around for very old software as they all tended to get
more bloated (or back then, even legitimate features people
frequently desired might add to that). Of course it would
need support Win95 and I don't know if ACDSee does or at
that version #3.0. You might find it uses less memory if
you don't install all the picture decoding filters, only
support for those image formats you're sure you need like
JPG. I recall at some point ACDSee allowed choosing what it
installed and on slower systems you can also see it loading
these support files when it starts.

Also I was wondering how many colors does Windows 98 support? Can it
go to 32-bit?


Yes it would do 32 bit but 24 bit is sufficient if the
display driver supports it, and Win98 uses more memory. You
might use "98lite" to make a very lightweight hybrid Win98
using Win95 shell, it could end up the most versatile.



P.S. the computer was purchased around the year 1995, if this helps.


Not really but keep in mind that it might be old and die on
you. If it has a Realtime Clock module instead of a coin
cell battery it might also be needing the clock set every
time even if it doesn't also stop during posting and require
manual intervention to complete the boot sequence. Other
parts like capacitors on the motherboard (and fans, if it
had ran for most of these past years) may be weak and
shorten lifespan... or it could run for another 10 years or
more instead, as back then the currents were lower and if
kept in a mild environment, kept clean and ventilated enough
that era of hardware tended to last a long time.
  #3  
Old May 23rd 07, 07:38 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16
Default Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.

Thank you for the great answer. This really cleared thing up.
So basically the decompressed image size does not even need to fit
into RAM but can be stored in virtual memory?

  #4  
Old May 23rd 07, 11:03 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware
GT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 889
Default Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.

wrote in message
ups.com...
Thank you for the great answer. This really cleared thing up.
So basically the decompressed image size does not even need to fit
into RAM but can be stored in virtual memory?


Yes, but the more RAM you have the faster things will be. An older PC like
that will no doubt have a slower hard drive, so swapping an image between
RAM and hard drive will be slow and jumpy. Best thing is to try it and see -
you might be able to pick up a little more memory on ebay or from the back
of a drawer somewhere, but just try it out first.


  #5  
Old May 23rd 07, 02:31 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware
Lord Weazel Nobilis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.

On May 22, 7:38 pm, wrote:
Hello everybody!
I have a friend with an old Pentium 1 desktop with windows 95 lying
around. I think that the processor is rated at 90 MHz and the system
has 16 MB of ram.
I was wondering if the computer is still powerful enough to be still
used to view .jpg images. The images do not have to be larger than
800x600 resolution.
I also have no idea about what graphics card the system has, but I
think that it definatley has 2 MB of onboard memory.
Otherwise I do not know anything else about the specs, and I would not
be able to provide additional information.
I was thinking of trying to get it to work with ACDSee 3.0. I tested
the program on my Windows XP machine, and it used about 10-12 MB of
ram when viewing .jpg's of these resolutions.
What are your thoughts on this? Can it be done?

Also I was wondering how many colors does Windows 98 support? Can it
go to 32-bit?

P.S. the computer was purchased around the year 1995, if this helps.

Any comments would be greatly appreciated!


I am almost always greeted with little surprises when I open models of
this vintage. See if you can find an open memory slot, OR, if it will
take a 32. Forthwith take your memory module (pref. in an
electrostatic bag) to the back of a large thrift store (Goodwill is
great for this) near the computer stuff & compare. See what you can
pick up. I once had tons vintage artifacts -I should have opened a
museum, anyway, it's fun to look! And learn (computer history at your
fingertips)!

  #6  
Old May 23rd 07, 05:52 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,418
Default Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.

On May 22, 7:38 pm, wrote:
Hello everybody!
I have a friend with an old Pentium 1 desktop with windows 95 lying
around. I think that the processor is rated at 90 MHz and the system
has 16 MB of ram.
I was wondering if the computer is still powerful enough to be still
used to view .jpg images. The images do not have to be larger than
800x600 resolution.



Sure, it can do that. More RAM is better, though. Especially if you
upgrade to win98 instead of win95.

I also have no idea about what graphics card the system has, but I
think that it definatley has 2 MB of onboard memory.
Otherwise I do not know anything else about the specs, and I would not
be able to provide additional information.
I was thinking of trying to get it to work with ACDSee 3.0. I tested
the program on my Windows XP machine, and it used about 10-12 MB of
ram when viewing .jpg's of these resolutions.
What are your thoughts on this? Can it be done?

Also I was wondering how many colors does Windows 98 support? Can it
go to 32-bit?



It's a function of the video card, not the os. With most 2mb video
cards, I think you get a compromise of 16bit color at a high
resolution or 24bit color at a lower resolution.




P.S. the computer was purchased around the year 1995, if this helps.

Any comments would be greatly appreciated!



  #8  
Old May 24th 07, 01:56 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware
kony
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,416
Default Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.

On 23 May 2007 15:00:13 -0700,
wrote:

now I have another question: How much RAM do windows 95 and 98 use
just by themselves with absolutely nothing running?



It doesn't necessarily matter. Once OS has loaded, some of
it can be swapped out to virtual memory to make room for the
image viewing code and image itself... and it would never be
swapped back into main memory since this is a single-purpose
system.

Win98 as a default installation is too large a memory
footprint for a system with only 16MB memory unless you are
content with a lot more swapping of virtual memory. Use
98Lite to improve that, with less of the OS installed and
running it will use less memory.

Win95... been too long since I used it, I think it needed a
little under 2MB just to run and would run on an 8MB system
fine before considering the application, which would leave
at least 8MB for the image viewer app plus image, or using
paging (slight delay when first starting the image viewing
app) would leave 16-2= 14MB for the app plus image.

IMO a lot of whether it will work ok for your needs could
have to do with other factors like whether the system
supports ATA33, supports a drive that isn't really old so
it's faster (but then is a higher capacity requiring bios
support from the old system OR an ATA(nnn) PCI controller
card for the capacity support).
  #9  
Old May 24th 07, 07:58 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,418
Default Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.

On May 23, 2:36 pm, wrote:
I was wondering if I could simulate the photo watching experience by
installing windows 95 in a VmWare virtual machine and then tweaking
the amount of memory available?


You could.... but WHY??? If you're going to virtualize win95, you
should have a better reason. There are photo viewing programs for
every OS since before the days of DOS.


  #10  
Old May 24th 07, 08:11 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,418
Default Viewing photos on a Pentium 1 Desktop.

On May 23, 3:00 pm, wrote:
now I have another question: How much RAM do windows 95 and 98 use
just by themselves with absolutely nothing running?


Win95 will BOOT on 4mb. It'll suck, but it'll boot. 8mb is the bare
min if you actually want to DO something. It's OK on 16mb. If you got
more than that, you might as well install win98se, as things will work
better all around. Surpisingly I found ie6 was more responsive on a
486 than ie5 was.

Win98 will run on 16mb, with basic functionality (internet, wordpad,
etc). 32 or more is better. 128 is better still. 512 is ridiculous,
and anything beyond 512 is impossible in win9x.




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
pentium compaq desktop foggie Homebuilt PC's 4 April 23rd 07 02:15 AM
need help finding a program that displays photos on the desktop Trevor Smithson Homebuilt PC's 2 February 18th 06 01:31 PM
Pentium M and desktop P4 MS Excel performance. One Punch Mickey Intel 5 April 28th 05 04:56 PM
Pentium M desktop picture G General 1 July 6th 04 09:44 PM
Mobile Pentium 4 oder Desktop P4 ? FrankE Intel 1 September 30th 03 10:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.