• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Topic: LitePC

  1. #1


    I just thought I\'d put this out there for folks to check out, partly my selfish/curious nature - hoping someone will try it and give an impression [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]


    These guys were legendary back in the Windows98 days for their 98lite that demolished the OS footprint and memory usage, never mind for their ability to uninstall internet explorer. For a bit of historical interest on the side, they were the group (if memory serves me) that disproved Microsoft\'s court claim back then that Internet Explorer was an integral non-removeable part of the OS. Anyway, it\'s XPlite that looks cool these days. Tweaker paradise. So many things to remove from the OS... Everything becomes an optional component.

  2. #2

    Re: LitePC

    LitePC is looking promising in the XP version. There\'s also Windows Startup Manager, which I\'ve not seen too much info about in audio circles. I\'m giving some strong consideration to experimenting with it after imaging my secondary audio PC (after a complete update and backup - likely this coming weekend). If it delivers on the promise, it could do well for starting up a DAW app and bypass explorer completely. The cofigurable boot-up scenarios look slick too, perhaps a bit more elegant than the native hardware profiling available in Windows.

    If anyone has experience with these apps, I\'d like to hear the accounts.

  3. #3

    Re: LitePC

    I am very interested to learn how much extra Ram can be squeezed from my three 1 Gb Windows 98 PC\'s. I am stuck with boards with only 3 DDR slots, so switching to 2 Gb XP will cost me six 1 Gb sticks and leave me with 6 unused 512 sticks... urgh.

    Has anyone already made this test? And how can you check how memory is allocated to Msg32 under Windows 98?

  4. #4

    Re: LitePC

    I just took the plunge and purchased 98Lite and customized one GigaStudio PC. I used the option to make several Windows components \"removable\", like MSIE. I did not create a clean install. After removing practically most options, including Internet Explorer GigaStudio just starts and runs fine, so there\'s no problem with removing all audio, video and directX stuff.

    The impact of this \"cleanup\" on free memory in GigaStudio is zero; I loaded my woodwinds template and before and after the treatment, the used memory is 91%. So, removing MSIE and several system components does not make more room for sample buffers. [img]graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

    Next test is to replace the Windows 98 Explorer shell with the smaller Windows 95 shell.


    Hehe, well, don\'t fix what ain\'t broke. The effect of stripping Win98 with 98Lite is ZERO for GigaStudio use. With the (much?) smaller Windows 95 Shell, the template still uses 91%.

    I must admit that the Start menus are a lot faster now [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

    Maybe the XP version will be more successful, but this test was 20 euros for nada [img]images/icons/frown.gif[/img]


  5. #5

    Re: LitePC

    Didn\'t actually test it with Giga running. But my system resources on booting up before installation is at 93% free. After a clean install to Windows 95 shell, my system resources is 99% free. (Windows ME with 512 MB RAM). Anyone tried the XP version?

  6. #6

    Re: LitePC

    The amount of free system resources does not report free RAM... but the available space in internal tables for operating system stuff like fonts, window desciptors, graphic elemtents, etc...

  7. #7

    Re: LitePC

    The problem with optimizing memory for Giga is that the 99% limit in Giga is based on hardware and system configuration (I don\'t know the algorithm) rather than \"free system resources\" during runtime. The runtime system resource tweaks doesn\'t help since Giga has already decided what 99% is by then.

    Under WinXP the 99% limit is about 53% of installed RAM on computers with up to 2GB RAM. More memory than that don\'t make a difference as you\'ve already hit the brickwall limit. Removing services or processes or trying to set system cache values etc during runtime doesn\'t help, the limit is still unchanged at about 53% of physical RAM.


  8. #8

    Re: LitePC

    I must admit that the Start menus are a lot faster now
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">The creators simply changed the \"MenuDelay\" parameter in the registry to make it LOOK LIKE everything\'s faster. Decievers, everyone of them! [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]


  9. #9

    Re: LitePC

    Hehe, yeah I know that.
    But still, it is probably true that several \"updates\" in Windows 98 and later MSIE updates have made the user interface slower. I have noticed this also on an old NT4 server (Pentium 1) that was quite responsive until the later MSIE versions \"needed\" to be put onto it...

Go Back to forum

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts