PCA Forums

Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC today that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive.




http://www.apcstart.com/teched/pivot/entry.php?id=6

Which is absurd for a desktop requirement. Typical M$ - another overbloated, eye-candy rich OS that forces everyone to upgrade their hardware.

It will probably offer nothing SUBSTANTIAL over XP (except the eye candy) but we'll all eventually have to upgrade because newer feature upgrades will eventually be abandoned for XP.

In all honesty, I've been tempted to install Win2K on my desktop and get rid of the bloat. The only nice feature of XP for me is system restore, but ERUNT allows you to make registry backups, and I make a Ghost Image of my boot partition every month anyway.

I have a Windows XP Pro disk, but I am back on forth on wether to upgrade. I love Win 2k, I just don't know if it is worth the upgrade. I guess if it ain't broke dont fix it. Should I upgrade?

XP is good compared to 2k now.

just turn all the goofy color crap off.

Greg

Its all speculation right now(by people that have no ties to microsoft), last time these reports came of 2gb min, 256mb vram min, it was all

Holy Bloatware Batman!

More than speculation. This was from an interview with a Tech Strategist working for Microsoft:

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/09/07 ... ware_reqs/

Damn! I stand corrected, and I think I will stay with XP

ok... so this is like getting a new car... that needs such a big engine to move that by the time all the weight is added you cant even get in the car with out it falling to the center of the earth. umm... this is the most stupid thing ever.

hell your gonna need 2 computers to run it. one to do the actual OS stuff and one to be a bloat gfx front end.

Utter BS that A OS needs that stuff to work properly.

Like needing a 100 pound engine to lift a 2 pound vehicle off the ground.

hopefully it will have a Manual section where we can remove crap from running that isnt necessary...like most everything.

Greg

i wonder if itll work with games? or will you need even more memory and power to run games with Vista? cause that would really be it for me if you needed that spec to run vista then needed more so that your games would work...

Games will have their own requirements. The reason Vista has these requirements is because the GUI is going to be running in Direct3D - the desktop will have 3D effects with transparency.

Frankly I think that's as useless as Microsoft's bastard brainchild "Active Desktop". Despite Mircosoft's expectations nobody really wanted to have a browser in their desktop wallpaper - ESPECIALLY if it cost you so much performance.

My feeling is a lot of Vista's dsktop features will be nothing but eyecandy and serve little actual useful purpose. There will always be people who will want the eye candy, but there will also be people like me who will prefer a fast desktop that doesn't slow down your work.

Okay, and to make matters worse there's going to be no less than SEVEN versions of WinVista:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050910-5298.html

Originally posted by FlyingPenguin
Okay, and to make matters worse there's going to be no less than SEVEN versions of WinVista:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050910-5298.html

This is great writing: "Last but not least, there's Ultimate Edition. Hey, I'm just glad that they didn't call it Extreme Edition"

My father in-law told me that he has a corp copy of Vista professional at the college already. I was under the impression that is was still beta. He is the Admin in their comp department (University of Texas). I am wondering how well it would fare on this machine. It dont meet the requirements but whos to say it wouldnt work.