<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Installing Windows 2000 and Windows XP on old computers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.nexle.dk/win2000-32mb/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.nexle.dk</link>
	<description>Just some links and opinions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:50:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: eXtreme gamer</title>
		<link>http://www.nexle.dk/win2000-32mb/comment-page-1/#comment-2951</link>
		<dc:creator>eXtreme gamer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2010 13:03:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nexle.dk/danielwin2000-32mb/#comment-2951</guid>
		<description>Some wrong facts 4 ultimate optimizing:

[HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\SessionManager\MemoryManagement] &quot;IoPageLockLimit&quot;

Myth - &quot;Increasing the IOPageLockLimit will lock more memory for exclusive access by the kernel, improving performance.&quot;

Reality - &quot;Indeed, it does do this but only in an RTM Windows 2000 machine. It does absolutely nothing in Windows 2000 Service Pack 1 and up, and absolutely nothing in Windows XP. This makes it effectively useless, since no one in their right minds would be running RTM Windows 2000. The RTM kernel references IoPageLockLimit. The SP1 kernel does not. Neither do any subsequent editions of the kernel; neither does the XP kernel in any of its incarnations.&quot;
************************************************************
[HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer] &quot;AlwaysUnloadDLL&quot;

Myth - &quot;Enabling AlwaysUnloadDLL frees up more memory and improves performance.&quot;

Reality - &quot;Adding this Registry Key in Windows 2000 or XP has no effect since this registry key is no longer supported in Microsoft Windows 2000 or later. The Shell automatically unloads a DLL when its usage count is zero, but only after the DLL has not been used for a period of time. This inactive period might be unacceptably long at times, especially when a Shell extension DLL is being debugged. For operating systems prior to Windows 2000, you can shorten the inactive period by adding this registry key.&quot;
************************************************************

Just take a look at the following page 4 more myth&#039;s:
http://home.comcast.net/~SupportCD/XPMyths.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some wrong facts 4 ultimate optimizing:</p>
<p>[HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\SessionManager\MemoryManagement] &#8220;IoPageLockLimit&#8221;</p>
<p>Myth &#8211; &#8220;Increasing the IOPageLockLimit will lock more memory for exclusive access by the kernel, improving performance.&#8221;</p>
<p>Reality &#8211; &#8220;Indeed, it does do this but only in an RTM Windows 2000 machine. It does absolutely nothing in Windows 2000 Service Pack 1 and up, and absolutely nothing in Windows XP. This makes it effectively useless, since no one in their right minds would be running RTM Windows 2000. The RTM kernel references IoPageLockLimit. The SP1 kernel does not. Neither do any subsequent editions of the kernel; neither does the XP kernel in any of its incarnations.&#8221;<br />
************************************************************<br />
[HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer] &#8220;AlwaysUnloadDLL&#8221;</p>
<p>Myth &#8211; &#8220;Enabling AlwaysUnloadDLL frees up more memory and improves performance.&#8221;</p>
<p>Reality &#8211; &#8220;Adding this Registry Key in Windows 2000 or XP has no effect since this registry key is no longer supported in Microsoft Windows 2000 or later. The Shell automatically unloads a DLL when its usage count is zero, but only after the DLL has not been used for a period of time. This inactive period might be unacceptably long at times, especially when a Shell extension DLL is being debugged. For operating systems prior to Windows 2000, you can shorten the inactive period by adding this registry key.&#8221;<br />
************************************************************</p>
<p>Just take a look at the following page 4 more myth&#8217;s:<br />
<a href="http://home.comcast.net/~SupportCD/XPMyths.html" rel="nofollow">http://home.comcast.net/~SupportCD/XPMyths.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yaro Kasear</title>
		<link>http://www.nexle.dk/win2000-32mb/comment-page-1/#comment-2879</link>
		<dc:creator>Yaro Kasear</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:16:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nexle.dk/danielwin2000-32mb/#comment-2879</guid>
		<description>Windows lacks the efficiency or power to revive old computers. I doubt it&#039;d be as fast as it used to be.

If you want to revive an old computer, put Linux on it. You can have the latest versions of any distro and have it as fast as any new computer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Windows lacks the efficiency or power to revive old computers. I doubt it&#8217;d be as fast as it used to be.</p>
<p>If you want to revive an old computer, put Linux on it. You can have the latest versions of any distro and have it as fast as any new computer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vvv2</title>
		<link>http://www.nexle.dk/win2000-32mb/comment-page-1/#comment-2789</link>
		<dc:creator>vvv2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 09:55:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nexle.dk/danielwin2000-32mb/#comment-2789</guid>
		<description>Nice! I like very old notebooks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice! I like very old notebooks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Installation von Win 2000 - Trojaner-Board</title>
		<link>http://www.nexle.dk/win2000-32mb/comment-page-1/#comment-1064</link>
		<dc:creator>Installation von Win 2000 - Trojaner-Board</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:14:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nexle.dk/danielwin2000-32mb/#comment-1064</guid>
		<description>[...] Installation von Win 2000       Machbar ist das wohl (Installing Windows 2000 and Windows XP on old computers &#124; Daniel Iversen - der Empfehlung auf dieser Seite, keine Service-Packs zu installieren, w</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Installation von Win 2000       Machbar ist das wohl (Installing Windows 2000 and Windows XP on old computers | Daniel Iversen &#8211; der Empfehlung auf dieser Seite, keine Service-Packs zu installieren, w</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
