IS YOUR COMPUTER READY TO RUN WINDOWS ?
by Alan Zisman (c) 1992. Originally published in INPUT, April 1992
When Windows 3.0 was released in the summer of 1990,
Microsoft aimed
it at a wide range of personal computers. Windows, we were told, could
be run on any IBM-compatible computer with a 286 or later processor, 1
meg of memory, a hard drive, and a graphics monitor. A mouse is
optional.
Windows can be loaded onto a machine meeting these
requirements. It
can even be loaded onto an XT with 640k memory. But saying Windows will
"run" on those machines is somewhat of an exaggeration. Walk, maybe.
Crawl?
Possibly.
And the whole point of Windows is to run Windows
applications-- Excel,
PageMaker, PerForm Pro, what have you. Many of these applications will
not even install on a minimum-requirement Windows computer. If they
load,
they will run so slowly as to be unusable.
Any graphical environment like Windows will be slower
than a text-based
environment like DOS... it's always easier to manipulate an 80x25
character
screen than a 640x480 pixel graphics screen. So Windows applications
won't
be as fast as their non-Windows equivalents. So what do you need to
really
make Windows a usable environment?
Processor-- Windows really can run acceptably on a 10
mhz or faster
286, and even better on a faster, more powerful processor. But
regardless
of your processor, it will only be usable with enough memory, and an
acceptable
hard drive and video system. (Note Windows 3.1, due this spring is
reported
to be significantly faster than version 3.0).
Note that Windows itself, doesn't make any use of a math co-processor.
Memory-- Despite Microsoft's claims, 1 meg of memory
is not really usable
for a Windows computer. 2 meg is really a bare minimum, with 4 meg a
much
more acceptable amount. This will let you dedicate 512k-1 meg for a
disk
cache, and still leave enough memory to run Windows and useful
applications.
Hard drive-- Windows 3.0 uses 6 megs, (Windows 3.1
will take more).
Most Windows applications seem to require 4-6 megs or more. (A full
installation
of Word for Windows v.2.0 takes about 15 megs). You could install
Windows
on that old 20 meg hard drive, but there wouldn't be much room for
anything
else. As well, Windows writes applications to disk if there isn't
enough
memory, so you'll need to have free space on your disk. Because of the
number of times Windows reads and writes from your disk, disk speed
limits
Windows' speed. (Having enough memory for a reasonable sized disk cache
helps in this regards). The moral-- bigger and faster is better. Don't
buy anything smaller than 60 meg or slower than 28 msecs.
Video display-- Windows will run on CGA, but only in
black and white,
as it needs the best resolution it can get. It will run fine (and
quickly)
in Hercules monochrome, but will lack the cute 3-D shadows and effects.
Consider upgrading to VGA (or super VGA), and consider colour, even for
everyday tasks like word processing or spreadsheets (besides, you won't
be able to tell the red cards from the black in Solitaire on a
monochrome
screen). Video card technology is changing rapidly, with big
improvements
in capability and price coming about in response to the demands that
Windows
has placed on computer displays.
Warning-- OS2 v.2.0, which is also due for a Spring
release, may make
even more demands on your hardware. It will definitely require a 386
(SX
or better) processor, and is rumoured to require a minimum of 8 megs of
memory, and over 12 meg of hard drive space. As computer applications
become
more sophisticated, more capable hardware will continue to be required.
Summary-- a Windows-capable computer should have at
least 2-4 meg memory,
a 60 meg fast hard drive, and preferably a VGA colour monitor. Windows
performance will be better with more than this minimum. With the price
of computer hardware plummeting, it's probably cheaper and easier to
purchase
a new 386SX or above than to try to upgrade an older computer.