Jack wrote: "So I recommend continuing with the current ATI video card,
...."
Unless I misunderstand, Rick, Susan alrady owns and has installed the
Radeon 7000, aka, VE card.

And, "ps: why don't you install the Intel drivers *then* choose "Do not
use in
this Hardware profile" ?"

did you read this in my 5/20 post?

"FWIW, my seven year old grand daughter now uses an ancient Celeron box for
her simple Win98 "Barbie" and "Bratz" games. It uses an early Intel Extreme
Graphics video system on the mainboard. I upgraded this to a modern 128 MB
nVidia FX 5200 video system, Chaintech, I think, with little problem. The
only twist is that the BIOS permits me to direct the initial boot detection
to the add-in PCI video card, but offers no way to disable the on-board
Intel Extreme Graphics. So at boot, the Hardware wizard wants to reinstall
the Intel video driver, which she just cancels. This occurs even though I
have disabled the Intel video device in the current Hardware Profile."

Susan's machine may work differently, but it may also exhibit the same
behavior as my granddaughter's box.
--
Jack E. Martinelli 2002-05 MS MVP for Shell/User / DTS
Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm
In Memorium: Alex Nichol
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/e...ts/nichol.mspx
Your cooperation is very appreciated.
------
"Rick T" wrote in message
...
I'd concur with the RAM upgrade, but why the videocard unless Susan is
planning on playing modernish 3D-intensive games.


Rick

ps: why don't you install the Intel drivers *then* choose "Do not use in
this Hardware profile" ?

Jack E Martinelli wrote:
Your Celeron II 700 MHz is pretty ancient stuff now. This box will
never be
a modern gaming machine.
It's a fine e-mailing, surfing, word processing machine.

So I recommend continuing with the current ATI video card, which my
quick
and dirty Google search suggests is the
Radeon® 7000 / Radeon® VE
http://www.ati.com/products/radeon7000/radeon7000/
You will have to examine physically the card to confirm. A label or
silkscreen should have the info.

While this card is so ancient, it is the third slowest video card, at
12.4
fps, in Tom's Hardware Guide first review of video cards, April 18,
2002,
where it is named the Radeon VE,
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/gra...charts-01.html

I don't doubt it runs rings around the on-board Intel video system,
using
either 32 or 64 MB of on-board DDR memory vs. the Intel shared system
memory.
FWIW, every card on this THG, VGA Charts I, graph is far slower than
the
slowest, modern FX5200 nVidia or Radeon 9250 card, available for ca. $50
today.
But I doubt your cpu and memory can even begin to drive those video card
to
their limits.

I also recommend installing another 128 MB, or 256, if funds permit, of
what
is most likely PC100 or PC133 sdram.
Perhaps, $US 25 - 45, after common rebates from major memory vendors
through
big box retailers. Lower price over the Internet.
After doing so, your WinME will seldom need to use the swapfile, under
normal situations.


And thanks for your prompt response. Happy computing now!