I agree with Demetri. Running Win3.1x with 8Mb RAM should work well, a bit slowly maybe, but it works - I did it with 2Mb and then 4mb RAM. The key is to run software designed for Win3.x, not for Win9x. Plenty of useful/usable software, if you don't need all the bells/whistles of today's software. Also, it might not be easy to find compatible RAM on today's mkt - I doubt that the typical "cheap" 100/133Mhz RAM of today is compatible with a 486/33 system. Ergo, if you want to run software designed for WinME or Win2k, etc, you must have a compatible system. I can't imagine a 486/33 system running today's software, but it can run yesterday's software very well. Many folks don't really need today's bells/whistles. Bottom line? Check the docs on the 486/33 to see how much and what kind of RAM sticks it will support. Good luck finding the type of RAM needed. If they need to run "modern" software, they should get a "modern" system and find another use for the 486/33. Jack Payton On Sun, 24 Jun 2001 19:23:04 -0400 Demetri Kolokotronis <[log in to unmask]> writes: > On Sun, 24 Jun 2001 16:02:13 -0700 Mark Rode <[log in to unmask]> > writes: > > Eight megs of RAM won't cut it for anything...even Win 3.1. I > > know..I lived with 8 megs of RAM on a 486 DX33 for a year > > back in 1993 or was it 92. > > > > Rode > > I ran Win95/IE on several computers with 8M RAM. Works; can be slow, but > not necessarily. RAM is cheap now, but upgrade RAM to replace 8M RAM may > not be. > > Demetri Kolokotronis PCBUILD's List Owners: Bob Wright<[log in to unmask]> Drew Dunn<[log in to unmask]>