WinXP browser?

XP isn't quite the resource hog later OS are. I survived XP just fine with my 2 GB RAM upgrade. I was pretty excited at the time. LOL I wouldn't put together anything now with less than 16 GB. 8 GB will cover most eventualities, but 16 GB covers a lot more. I learned a lot breaking XP on a regular basis, but I wouldn't go back to it if they gave a free computer to go with it. Search is about 1000x faster on 7 than Rover ever was for me. And now people running W7 are looked at like the XP folks were when 7 came out. The irony is not lost on me.

Alaric said:

XP isn't quite the resource hog later OS are. I survived XP just fine with my 2 GB RAM upgrade. I was pretty excited at the time. LOL I wouldn't put together anything now with less than 16 GB. 8 GB will cover most eventualities, but 16 GB covers a lot more.

Click to expand...

True, 1st PC i ever had with XP on it ran on 256mb, 8.1 can run on 2gb (64bit) but the SSD/HDD with the swapfile will be the one to pay the price. That's why we always double up on the memory, the more you have the faster the system becomes overall because everything will load from memory if properly coded.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/314865/system-requirements-for-windows-xp-operating-systems

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/12660/windows-8-system-requirements


Coming back to the topic, all the more reason to go Opera if Firefox is this massive memory hog everyone keeps going on about ? IMHO OP should try all of them for a few days and then draw it's own conclusions

I'm on Opera just about every time I'm on here and I have no complaints. It's certainly fast enough for me and doesn't seem to have any glaring flaws that I've noticed.

orion456 said:

Not like winxp 64bit couldn't have had updates to bring it nearly equal to win7. M$ just needed a fancy new OS for us to buy as opposed to free fixes to its security flawed mess.

Isn't it weird that after 15 years winxp still needs numerous monthly security updates?

I wonder how many people actually need more than 4GB? Right now I am using 1.2 GB and TaskMgr says my peak use is 2.9GB and that is over the last two weeks of 24/7 use.

I'm not saying win7 isn't a logical step, maybe even necessary, but killing winxp is definitely more about $ than necessity for most users.

Click to expand...

Yeah, sure they could do that but the code bloat would get bigger and bigger and the efficiency and responsiveness of the OS would get less and less. If you have ever done a fresh install of Windows XP and used it before adding in all the years of updates you will recall what I mean. After all the updates are added in it slows down dramatically. You can take an old shack and keep adding rooms to it to make a big house but the HVAC efficiency goes out the window. That's one reason MS comes out with a new OS every few years is that efficiency factor caused by patch code boat. They also do it to generate new revenue, I get that, but if they went out of business because they weren't selling new products where would we all be?