tiny XP

jerry123 · Post by **jerry123** » Wed Jun 28, 2006 11:33 pm

Has anyone heard of or is anyone using Tiny XP in their PC DAW?
A friend was telling me about it as being a version of XP that is stripped down to the bare esentials. Aparently, it takes up 400MB on the harddrive and uses about 20 MB of RAM when running. It comes with no drivers, networking features, caculator...nothing. Just XP.
A Google search leads me to believe that it may not be a legit product of any kind (warez) and if it is, please excuse this post. I don't need anything unlawful on my PC.
I'm just curious if anyone has any info on it at all.

stinky · Post by **stinky** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:13 am

use nlite to roll your own legit copy..

http://www.nliteos.com/guide/

stinky · Post by **stinky** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:16 am

BTW, i wouldn't go using a warezed version either... you never really know what's actually in one.. you might find that you've been owned before you even have a chance to bulletproof your system..

jerry123 · Post by **jerry123** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:41 am

Thank you Stinky!

For anyone else interested, here is a better description I found:

"I've recently been running a heavily modified version of XP pro known as TinyXP. I've been aware of this mod for a while but had heard rumours of crashiness and incompatibility problems, any way, out of curiosity (and because I was doing a format/reinstall anyway) I downloaded Rev.4 and stuck it on a disc (fresh installs only before someone starts spouting about using Daemon Tools to save the 25 cent cost of a CD). The size of the iso file intruiged me - less than 150MB! But it booted fine and proceeded with a completely automatic install (no SN needed here). There is a funny little double-restart when installation is complete but then it started up just fine (and OMFG fast too). Basically it is the bare bones - all the **** is gone, no Movie Maker in this one folks, it is streamlined to the max.

And let me tell you about the performance! My computer is nothing special - P4 1.8ghz, GeForce 3 Ti200, 640MB, but this OS FLIES!!! Basic tasks like opening a browser window are now literally instant! My TV tuner card suffered from not bad but annoying motion blur under my old XP install - no more. Everything just works better. Tiny XP is so frugal with your CPU/RAM it's unbelievable, right at this moment with Steam running, IE running, Azureus running and my wireless software running there are only a total of 24 processes shown, at least ten less than I had before with nothing running. Just for fun, I stuck TinyXP on my PII 400mhz laptop - it runs faster than the old 98SE install!

If you want to squeeze the most out of your hardware and don't want to go the Linux route you should definitely check this out - it even recognised and installed all the P & P hardware in my machine so somehow that 150MB install disc contains a complete set of drivers too! The one problem that I had was that it didn't recognise my widescreen LCD and wouldn't provide the 1400 x 900 32 bit resolution I use, but I just downloaded the latest Nvidia drivers and problem solved. "

longjohns · Post by **longjohns** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:05 am

so-

subtracting their apps - they've got about 20 processes going

i've got 14 currently - so how much more bare bones could it be??

this is really tempting to try - except - experience has taught me to NOT FUCK WITH IT IF ITS WORKING

stinky · Post by **stinky** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:13 am

a standard installation of windows can install upward of 2+ gigs for just your windows folder. beyond that, alot of the default processes and services running standard are a waste of precious resources. If you're not convinced, ghost your machine, and try it out.. you've got nothing to lose. I guarantee you'll never install a full blown copy again..

longjohns · Post by **longjohns** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:46 pm

i've already spent lots of time stripping it down to where it is now, and it's working fine. so what i stand to lose is more time, that's all.

i'm not running a full-blown standard xp install. as i said, i've already got fewer processes running than that person is claiming they've got on their tiny xp. it's true, i've got movie maker on there, but it doesn't really bother me.

i did reinstall paint, so that i can view and edit .bmp screen caps.

i think i may try it the next time i need to do a fresh install. then there really won't be anything to lose

jamesp · Post by **jamesp** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:05 pm

If anyone's thinking of doing this, I'd be very interested in seeing the "before and after" Live Five test results, thanks.

stinky · Post by **stinky** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:04 pm

i'm not running a full-blown standard xp install. as i said, i've already got fewer processes running than that person is claiming they've got on their tiny xp. it's true, i've got movie maker on there, but it doesn't really bother me.

sorry, that sounds like an over-simplification of the point. It's not whether or not movie maker is on your installation. It's the fact that you have control over the installation of windows, which you don't have with the standard windows installation shell. Of course you can install all of windows, like normal, and then go back and remove all the crap, like everyone else. But this adds a control factor, that you otherwise don't have.. allowing you to customize your own installation (to be able to reuse, and reedit as you see fit) so that you don't have to go back to remove all that crap later.

Regardless, windows runs about 4 dozen services right off the bat, by default. Additionally, there are only a few processes that the OS can't live without (like explorer, winlogon, etc.)... you don't need shit like spoolv, etc... you can even kill services, and see what happens. It really depends on your system, and what exactly you're using.. if you're on the net, you're going to need more processes, and addons that don't come with windows.

I think that not having level of control is what turned alot of people off to windows (being dumbed down in general), and moved people over to linux, where you can have as much control as you want. Then you started seeing utilities such as nlite and pebuilder for windows. Hell, the only reason BartPE ever came out was because of knoppix. No one would have even considered having a Windows Live CD beforehand...

But, i digress.. i'd rather have all that removed before i boot into windows for the first time.

Hatchets McGee · Post by **Hatchets McGee** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:29 pm

my pc is a vaio lappie....you dont get the xp install discs, you get four recovery discs which have XP in there somewhere, but it installs sony shit too....

do you know if its possible to use these 'tiny xp' programs in this scenario ?

also, I'm going to have to buy a copy of windows XP anyways - to install on my mactel at some point. Is it possible to install that XP on another machine too ? or is windows xp 'locked' to the first machine its installed on ? Online authorisations etc ?

stinky · Post by **stinky** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:38 pm

OEM version of windows are that way for a reason. They're recovery discs, and don't have a 'real' version of windows. They are more like ghosted images of your manufacturer's base installation. Your manufacturer uses it to lock you in.. they have agreements with MS not to hand you a full blown copy (probably to limit the amount of pirated copies available, and to limit you from using that copy to install on other machines yourself).. You'll not be able to use that as a source.

Is it possible to install that XP on another machine too ? or is windows xp 'locked' to the first machine its installed on ? Online authorisations etc ?

that depends on how "customized" you want your installation to be. You can customize it for a laptop only, or you can customize it just enough to work across different environments. That's really up to you. Honestly though, anyone who wants to go this route should be willing to try it a couple of times. You're not going to get it right off the bat. You'll find after you customized your installation, that you're missing this or that, or you wanted to remove this or that.. it will probably take you several attempts to get to the point that you feel comfortable with your base. Additionally, you'll have more forward-thinking to contend with if your looking to install across several types of systems..

Hatchets McGee · Post by **Hatchets McGee** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 5:15 pm

but when I buy windows XP, I can install it on my mactel. AND on another machine ?

or is it one copy of XP per machine ?

cos I have two..

stinky · Post by **stinky** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 5:45 pm

but when I buy windows XP, I can install it on my mactel. AND on another machine ?

or is it one copy of XP per machine ?

cos I have two..

well, if staying legit is a concern for you then, of course, you can't install one copy on two machines. That's a given, and judging by the way you phrased your question, you don't need someone else to tell you that.

Hatchets McGee · Post by **Hatchets McGee** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 7:52 pm

stinky wrote:well, if staying legit is a concern for you then, of course, you can't install one copy on two machines. That's a given, and judging by the way you phrased your question, you don't need someone else to tell you that.

Hatchets McGee wrote:Is it possible to install that XP on another machine too ? or is windows xp 'locked' to the first machine its installed on ? Online authorisations etc ?

it seems you completely missed that part, well...you referenced it but didnt answer it....or I'm going senile.

(buying one copy is legit enough for me, unless they have methods for preventing it - I will install it on two machines)

stinky · Post by **stinky** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 8:45 pm

I have no problem with that... at least you're being honest.. personally, i could care less what you do... there's nothing preventing you from installing it on as many machines as you like, but don't even think about updating using automatic updates, lest you find yourself in this kind of predicament:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=84