Second that. I bought a 3.0 GHz Pentium core 2 duo, 4 megs ram, 1 Tb
HDD, WITH win 7 pro 64 bit, from them for $199 plus shipping. Added
another 4 megs ram for about $30 from EBay and it's been a great
computer for her.
I buy used Dell Optiplex and such machines from their industrial-grade
line (not the consumer-grade stuff). Looking at them, I sure can't
tell the difference, except maybe the sheet metal work is a bit lighter
on the consumer models. But, their commercial desktops are just amazingly
robust. I recently replaced my main desktop, an Optiplex GX400 which
** I ** had been using for TWELVE years after buying it used. My daughter
is now using it.
If you swap the disk drive into the new machine, M$ should only require
a re-registration of the new hardware (if that). You can also clone
the old hard drive to a brand-new SSD.
I would recommend NOT trying to save the CPU. CPUs and motherboards have
a constant progression of models, and unless you are a real PRO with
them, you could easily end up with incompatible parts.
Memory is another matter. There are different number of contacts on the
memory connectors (used to be 240- and 204-contacts) as well as
different bus speeds, and DDR, DDR2, DDR3, etc. Some MBs accept
several types and speeds, others are more picky.
I use Linux, and it is outstandingly reliable and immune to various
crap people try to put on your computer without your knowledge.
A Windows C: drive boots in a different machine but loudly and
frequently warns you that it failed validation, and becomes harder and
harder to use. It lasted long enough to prove that the stubborn
problem I was chasing was a driver instead of the hardware.
I've triggered the validation warning by uninstalling (not removing)
the hardware of a Broadcom Trusted Platform Module security add-on
without any other changes. This is the type of problem that made me
maintain a master C: drive for each computer, which I clone to other
"sandbox" drives to use. Cloning or restoring a whole partition's
backup is a bulletproof System Restore but it won't transfer a
validated OS installation to other hardware without personal
absolution of your sin from M$. Find something soft to kneel on before
The master drive can be the small original that came with the used
computer if it passes SMART checks etc. The one for this laptop is a
large drive in a bootable CD-bay caddy that also holds my archived
eBooks and downloads in a second partition.
See "Data collected".
AFAIK it allows individual, infrequent changes to the objects it
surveys. Frequently swapping hard drives, all descended from the
master, has never bothered mine.
You've been less than forthcoming about why you want a new motherboard.
The one you have is way better than you need for what you say you want
Is it broke?
I get all my computers at garage sales.
Most of the "broken" ones were fixed by blowing the dust out of the
cpu heat sink. The rest required changing a couple of caps.
If you like to tinker or are cheap, it's worth at least making an attempt
to fix it.
If you're made of money or just want a new machine, go buy a machine.
Everything in the middle is a crap shoot. Mixing stuff is fraught with
I bought a CPU to upgrade a motherboard. Turns out that the cpu is
fully compatible with the hardware, but the bios cpu table was never
to recognize it...and never will be.
Unless the motherboard specifically calls out compatibility with the
EXACT processor you have, you're in for a bumpy ride.
On Thursday, June 19, 2014 3:44:56 PM UTC-4, mike wrote:
Yeah, Coombs (5th post from the top) apparently thinks that all that is bullshit, though. How do you maintain the motherboard's intended magnetic fields/temperatures?
But yeah, if you like to aimlessly tinker, then reuse processors or even something like cutting up printed circuits.
If you are tired of paying Microsoft every time you change the
color adjustment on your monitor -- let alone make some more substantial
change -- why not go to some version of linux. Nothing you have listed
above seems to exclusively call for Windows -- unlike certain CAD
programs or the like which may only be *made* for Windows.
How old is your previous system? You don't say, other than
Has Microsoft stopped checking the whole configuration of the
system (how many disks of what size, how much memory, what graphics
card, and all) and just checks the serial number in the CPU now? If
they still do all the checks I mentioned, keeping the same CPU (*if* you
can find a modern motherboard which will accept it) may not be enough to
keep them off your back. Using linux (or some other unix which works on
PC hardware) will not only get them off your back, but also make them
quite unhappy in a way that they can't legally do anything about it. :-)
I really don't know. It depends on what they check these days.
I've acquired several computers pre-loaded with XP and more
recently Windows 7, and the first thing that I did was to strip out that
disk and install either OpenBSD, Solaris 10, or Ubuntu linux, depending
on what I wanted to do with the system.
Linux certainly has its place.
There are serious issues with compatibility with your decades of
Sure, you can get MUCH of the functionality you need,
as long as you're willing
to learn new apps, new procedures, new everything, and convert your data
and just say goodbye to stuff
that isn't compatible. The devil is in the details of that small
percentage of stuff isn't supported in linux, but you feel you
MUST be able to do.
Then there's the issue that every version of every linux distro
seems to feel the need to change everything at each release.
Just as you're starting to get a handle on it, it changes.
Much the same function with different methods. CHAOS!!
FWIW, MS has never been "on my back." Virtually every computer
comes with it and it just works. But I do ride the linux
mechanical bull when I need amusement. Damn thing keeps throwing
I'm itching to assist anyone wishing to convert to linux.
Just send me your old windows install DVD. COA and the license keys.
I'll put 'em to use and prevent you backsliding into windows.
Just doin' my part to speed the world's conversion to linux on the desktop.
Email me them windows license keys you'll not be using.
And, of course, all this linux talk has zero to do with what motherboard
Note my text above, which I'll move down here again:
===================================================================== Nothing you have listed above seems to exclusively call for
Windows -- unlike certain CAD programs or the like which may
only be *made* for Windows.
==================================================================== Nothing that he had listed above as his intended use *required*
Windows, or compatibility with Windows programs. He mentioned nothing
about CAD programs or others which really needed Windows to maintain
compatibility. All he *said* that he wanted was file storage, and
internet surfing. If he is already using Thunderbird, that would not
even require any re-learning. It works pretty much the same on any OS
for which it is available.
Now -- if the "file storage" listed above includes files created
by applications which are not available for linux -- *that* could be a
problem. But for all we know, they are plain text files -- or even
files created by MicroSoft Word (use LibreOffice to access those).
And -- if he had to, he *could* run the current Windows on a
virtual machine inside the linux. Yes, a little slower -- but it could
be recreated (very quickly) from a backup whenever he needs to run it
and then waved goodby to when he shuts off the machine -- thus blowing
away any virus infections from incautious browsing. Just make sure to
back up any newly-crated files that he really *needs* to preserve.
So -- don't upgrade if you are happy with what works already.
I've got systems running Sun's Solaris from back in version 2.6, and
some machines which I would have to use SunOs 4.1.1 or earlier to run.
Have you tried moving your Windows disks to a new machine
without getting Microsoft's blessing first? They are the only ones I
know of who make that difficult on purpose.
For me -- no worry about backsliding into Windows. I've been
using unix (various flavors) since before Windows came out. I've used
it only when I needed a "popular" OS for programs which don't support
less popular ones. Now, for that I have a token Mac Mini. Things like
income tax software and GPS update programs are what cause me to use a
Back when I did that with Windows, I typically did not boot that
machine more often than perhaps three times in a year.
Well ... programming in raw machine language is (or was) called
"Programming on the bare metal". But almost nobody does that any more. :-)
That's very true as I addressed, but irrelevant since I buy a newer,
faster used machine for the later OS it comes with.
To me "If you want to use linux" sounds like "if you want to be a
vegan" -- please validate my contrarian choice.
I used whatever the company required without religious objection; VAX,
Apollo, Mac, Solaris, Windows, even Novell Netware and HP1000
We're in high agreement about the state of linux.
Difference is that you ignore the significant effects of those minor
lacks of support.
99.9% of the time I spend at my keyboard is using firefox or thunderbird.
For those, it really doesn't matter which OS I use.
So the 99.9% statistic sounds like a no-brainer...
Statistics rarely tell the whole story.
My VOIP system is not supported by linux.
When I run linux, I don't have a phone. Kinda defeats the purpose
of having a phone.
I have four TV cards that I use to time-shift TV.
None are supported by linux.
When I run linux, my TV doesn't record.
Kinda defeats the purpose of having a TV recorder.
If I edit a text file in one system and then another, it inevitably
merges all the lines into one long line. Not cool.
I don't write many programs, but they're all in Visual Basic.
Or PIC basic pro.
Or Palm basic.
NEVER in C.
I've amassed a number of utility programs that I'm not willing to port.
Rebooting doesn't sound like much until you realize that you loose
all your bookmarks and history and passwords and all the other stuff
automagically maintained by the OS and apps. No problem, build yet
another linux machine to be a mail server...yeah, right!!
If you're gonna run windows in a VM, you still have all the activation
issues plus another layer of confusion/configuration for the apps.
Remember that most of the really good stuff developed for/by linux
has been ported to windows.
Another way of looking at the situation is exemplified in Firefox.
The user interfaces are different enough to be annoying.
Look at the configuration menu. Different places.
OK, stand on your soapbox and scream that linux does it the "right"
way. That's not the issue. The issue is that the minority linux
version defies convention and thumbs it's collective nose at the
incumbent majority. It may be right, but it's a lousy strategy
if you want more linux desktop users.
The only valid reason that typically shows up is the malware issue.
And it's WAY overblown for those of us with the restraint to watch where
we are and avoid clicking on everything shiny...and use firewall/malware
I don't think I've EVER had a malware problem. I've had a few alerts
from the virus scanner, but most of them were false positives. The rest
were where expected malware and ran on a separate machine. If linux
ever achieves major use on the desktop, you can be sure that the malware
will catch up. Security of the OS is a minor issue. The careless clicky
finger is the bigger issue. And that's OS independent.
So, if you gotta run windows for anything, you might as well run
it for everything. You can always run linux in a VM if you ever
find anything that must have it.
I boot a live linux CD for online banking.
Otherwise, haven't fired off my linux VM
except when I was really, really bored and needed more
frustration in my diet. Ditto for the other three linux
machines sitting gathering dust. The effort required to walk
across the room to push the power button far exceeds any benefit
to be gained.
Booting a live linux thumb drive is an excellent way to test
used computers. Most people don't do that a lot. Interesting
that I messed with creating that live thumb drive for a long time
using linux. Finally ran the windows utility to do it. click, click,
done! I can multi boot two linuxes, one windows and save a bunch of
files using one thumb drive and a windows utility to make it.
And I had to learn nothing, zero, nada about command line utilities
or partitions or boot flags or boot managers
or anything else operatingsystemy.
Linux on the desktop is so close that we can taste it. But with the current
development infrastructure that lets anybody and their dog modify the code
and add a new distro to the chaos, I don't expect it will ever stabilize
and defragment to the degree necessary to displace MS. There's just too
much linux ego involved and no leadership. There are also problems
with the business model of "FREE as in beer". Hard to make a business
out of that...unless it's a business helping other businesses navigate the
And, for most of us, windows is "free" too. It comes with the hardware.
But it's only been a few decades...see where it goes.
Maybe MS will commit suicide.
My first home desktop computer was a Unix system in '89.
I've run linux since the days it would fit on a floppy.
I've got more linux distro CD's than I can count...most
have been installed and run over the years.
In all this time, nothing compelling...
Are we having fun yet?
[ ... all of my previous text snipped -- not needed here I think ... ]
Granted. Were you the one who posted the original problem?
I've lost track there. If not, does *he* really want to do anything
which linux can't do for him?
O.K. I don't use VOIP so did not consider that.
But there are times when I consider a state of "no phone" to be
a *benefit* when trying to work on something. :-)
O.K. Again not something which I do.
*Plain* text? Hmm ... you do know about the dos2unix and
unix2dos programs? Convert the <CR><LF> pair that MS-DOS uses to the
<LF> which unix uses and back the other way. Interesting, they are not
present in my Ubuntu box.
O.K. "apt-get install unix2dos" got them both, so I don't even
have to bother compiling them from source.
Most word processors seem to like to keep each paragraph as a
single massively long line.
Unix editors like gnu can handle any line length you can fit in
the system's memory.
Jove (my one favorite editor) barfs at over 2K line length --
but an easy change to the source and a re-compilation turns it to some
thing more reasonable. I forget whether the max is currently 32K or 64K
but somewhere around there is enough to deal with the e-mail with the
"paragraph is a single line" disease. :-)
O.K. I've never used VB. I'll bet that the PIC basic pro (or
an equivalent) is available from somewhere. (It didn't *come* with the
Windows box, did it?) Perhaps even the Palm basic as well.
I've written in a number of BASICs, (the best two were HP's
Rocky Mountain Basic, and MicroWare's BASIC-09 for OS-9.)
Assembly language for motorola's MC6800 and MC6809.
A little FORTRAN.
Quite a bit of Pascal.
Different strokes for different folks.
O.K. Your choice. I ported a bunch of utilities which I wrote
from DOS-68 to OS-9 to Unix with C only being an option in the latter
I find FireFox offering to sync my bookmarks and the like
between systems -- though I don't know whether that translates to
storing it offline somewhere *they* own. :-)
Bookmarks can easily be exported into HTML and then read into a
browser on another system.
Right -- with the benefits that the virtual environment can be
stable while you add or change hardware, since it is all emulated
anyway, so once you have it configured, you don't need to worry about
Yes -- even the command-line stuff. I used a batch of unix
utilities in a Windows machine at work to make myself happier. Trying to
remember who the vendor was. And later, there is the CYGWIN.
O.K. Since I don't use Windows, I didn't know about that. Same
thing between Any of my unix programs and the Mac Mini with OS-X. The
Mac moves all the stuff which was in the top bar of programs into its
own top bar, which changes depending on where the focus is. (The Mac
does have a unix under the GUI, and I go to that level frequently,
because *I* am more comfortable in that environment.
Nope! It is more a matter of the comfortable way.
Now where I would scream about the right way vs the wrong way
would be on keyboards -- in particular the location of the "Control" key.
For me, it really needs to be to the left of the 'A' key, and I could do
without the "Caps Lock" totally. But this is because a lot of the
programs I use require frequent use of the "Control" key. As a result,
I tend to collect Sun USB keyboards and use them with the ex Windows
boxes, and the Mac Mini, and everything where I can.
Actually -- it is more that it follows a *different* convention,
formed by the X11 community, and things like SunTools and other
windowing systems which preceded X11. For those of us who prefer unix,
it is a very comfortable convention.
And -- a lot of that is selectable by which GUI you use. There
are a number of them, including those which people who came to the unix
world from Windows wrote to look like unix.
And the Mac can easily claim that their convention is the
*original* one, as they got the windowing system from the Xerox Star,
and Microsoft got Windows by trying to copy Apple's Macintosh. (Not
to mention how they got MS-DOS -- by ripping off (through a third party)
CP/M-86. Go early enough in the MS-DOS world, and you will find Digital
Research (CP/M) copyright notices compiled into the utilities. :-)
Well ... I recently got an e-mail which I *know* carried the
"CryptoLocker" malware. It didn't do anything, because my system:
1) Does not try to run everything in e-mail attachments. *
2) Does not know how to run a ".exe" or a ".scr" file.
3) Does not know how to run Intel code. I'm typing on an
UltraSPARC system. :-)
* Outlook Express at least used to (unless carefully configured
from the default shipped) try to preview attachments, and would
often execute malware in the process.
Of course, if you don't use Microsoft's e-mail clients, you are
less likely to trigger something like this -- except by careless
My biggest problem from malware was on day-one of one in
particular, which was infecting Windows machines around the world, and
they were *all* trying to send me copies to infect my systems too. My
systems could not be infected, but 900+ large binaries really brought my
e-mail system to a crawl, until I activated the "databytes" limit on
qmail -- which rejected anything above the limit set in that file.
Absolutely. But if you can keep people from reading e-mail as
root the damage which it can do is minimized. And not having e-mail
clients which happily try to "preview" attachments by (possibly) running
them is another big help.
And for systems exposed to the outside net, I run OpenBSD -- a
unix flavor which is aggressively security conscious.
While I have a dedicated Windows machine which is almost never
booted. Perhaps once or twice a year.
One of the other things I like about my unix systems -- I can
log into any of them around the house without having to walk to where
they are. I use ssh to log in (encrypted data transfer, and doubly
encrypted during the login phase), and once logged in, I start a program
on that system, and it pops up a window on the system from which I
connected, and accepts the keyboard and mouse form that system. (There
is a program to let that be done between Windows and Unix (both
directions) -- but while running the Windows system from a remote
machine, the Windows screen duplicates the screen seen by the remote
system -- and anyone who comes by there can play with the mouse and
keyboard to interfere with what you are doing. On the unix systems, not
only is that a different session (no interaction), but I can use it from
its own keyboard and monitor while two or three others are also using
the same system.
O.K. I created a bootable thumb drive to install linux on a
CD-ROM-less machine (larger than a palm-top, smaller than a laptop)
using the Mac Mini. It just happened to be easier at the time.
This is one reason that I prefer OpenBSD for systems exposed to
the outside net. Serious security focus, single person at the head of
And yes -- I dislike later versions of Ubuntu linux for probably
the same reasons that Windows users might like it. :-)
Some companies *must* have a service contract. For them, RedHat
Not always. I get some of my hardware from hamfests, and there
may not even be a disk drive in there, let alone an OS.
They may, indeed.
And mine were (in order)
1) Altair 680b (raised from a kit)
2) SWTP 6800 (also from a kit).
3) SWTP 6809 (also from a kit, and the first to run a somewhat
unix-like OS -- OS-9.
4) COSMOS CMS-16/UNX (v7 unix on Motorola 68000 CPU).
And gazillions since then.
While I really liked OS-9, and from there I got access to weird
unix systems at work -- being used for an e-mail system written in
*FORTRAN* of all things. But that prepared me for the unix system from
And all of this before I every *used* a MS-DOS machine, let
along a Windows machine.
You have climbed the learning curve and know how to make linux do what
you need. We have done the same with Windows, and I once was there on
a Mac. If the set of what one does well, which isn't universal for any
of them, fits your needs that's fine, but it may not be the best for
someone else with different needs. They are tools, not competing
Here's the experiment I did.
I made a dual boot system with win7 and whatever version of whatever
distro with whatever desktop was popular at the time.
The experimental parameters were...
Boot any OS.
When you found something that REQUIRED the other OS,
boot that one and stay there until you found something
that REQUIRED the first OS.
(REQUIRED meant I couldn't find something applicable in the repository
that would actually install and work without intimate knowledge of missing
dependencies, wrong library version, compile from source... etc.)
Started with linux.
Very quickly had to boot windows.
NEVER needed to boot into linux again.
After a few weeks, I called the experiment conclusive and deleted
the linux partition.
At the risk of repeating myself, it's not about the 99.9% that linux
can do. It's about the 0.01 that a normal human can't do that's
a deal breaker.
Computer users, most of whom are windows users, don't have ANY
interest in learning that they can do the same stuff in a different
way, most of the time. They want it to just work. They/we have zero
interesting in knowing how or why. Just click the box and get what
we want. If I wanted another hobby, I'd get one...and it wouldn't
You overly exaggerate the problems of Windows. It's as big as it is
for good reasons.
Mitre dumped MS after the Cuckoo's Egg incident and tried to live on
Macs and Sparcs but whenever we really needed to get something done in
the lab we had to get permission for a Windows PC. I've watched newly
graduated engineers who were pious linux accolytes slowly and
grudgingly switch to XP, with Cygwin as a last futile gesture of
It was no fun at all when they hit me with linux and discovered I knew
it plus commands they didn't, as I had once been asked to write DOS
batch files that emulate the common unix commands and switches.
Your AMD FX-4100 CPU was released in 2011 and was at that time the low
end of the AMD-41xx series. On the other hand with the exception of
the L2 cache memory (4 mbyte) its performance figures are very similar
to my Intel core5-4670 (L2 cache - 6 mb) so performance for web
surfing and data handling will likely be satisfactory.
You say that your new MB will require DDR3. Your current memory chips
should have a number on them for identification.
Amazon sells 8 gig, DDR3 1333 mhz for about $70 a set and 4 gig sets
of 4 gig 1600 mhz for about $75/set. You will need two chips (1 set)
as the board likely has dual channel memory.
The page you reference shows several MB's, the first of which seems to
be a dial CPU board, but the others all have 4 SATA connections.
What are you trying to accomplish by replacing the motherboard? Will
re-using the existing processor accomplish that?
Does your old computer use UEFI bios? If not, forget it. You will need
to totally reinstall EVERYTHING on the hard drive to use the ASUS
boards.If it does, you will have to do it for the others.
Personally I won't touch an AMD processor unless I get it for free. I
have an AMD laptop - I got it for free and spent $6 to fix it.
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.