Windows Vista

killua · 02-28-2006, 06:33 AM

I have a Pentium 4 1.5Ghz and Geforce MX-200 32MB VRAM and 640MB DDRAM. My monitor however is running at 800x600 resolution only (15 inch). Do you think Windows Vista will run at a minimum resolution of 800x600 just like WinXP? Also is my computer capable of running Windows Vista (even classic interface only)?

**G10** · 02-28-2006, 06:41 AM

You would have to look into their HCL to see as I don't think it really possible for any of us to know what hardware it will work with.

BTW - This is going to be moved to the computers subforum

Jimmeij · 03-03-2006, 05:56 AM

Why would you want to run Vista when it's not even released yet? Anyway no it won't run it great. I installed Vista (BETA 1) a while back and it was really eating from my CPU and memory. I am running a P4 3.8Ghz and 2GB DDR memory.

Ferre · 03-03-2006, 06:16 AM

I'm happy with XPpro and it does all I need. I fail to see why I should start using something else.

WorldwideTrading · 03-03-2006, 09:01 AM

I want to see if I can get windows ce running on my pc. I have already prevented half of the services windows xp starts with as I simply dont need them but its still bloated.

Its like .net, why does it make so much ram to create one form with hello world written on it. Its rediculous!

Pretend · 03-03-2006, 02:12 PM

I'm with Ferre, I'm perfectly satisfied with XP Pro. Ok, not perfectly satisfied, but happy enough. Plus, I'm too broke to upgrade.

**G10** · 03-03-2006, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by killua

I have a Pentium 4 1.5Ghz and Geforce MX-200 32MB VRAM and 640MB DDRAM. My monitor however is running at 800x600 resolution only (15 inch). Do you think Windows Vista will run at a minimum resolution of 800x600 just like WinXP? Also is my computer capable of running Windows Vista (even classic interface only)?

Let me give you a tip killua, there are 2 kinds of people that upgrade as soon as new software/hardware come out.

1. The techs/nerds
2. People that have to have the latest everything.

The issue with upgrading to a new product even though it has been tested (

) is that there are going to be teething issues with it. There always are and this is not going to be an exception to the rule.

It could potentially have security flaws in it. It could render your system useless. It could stop certain apps working correctly.

This is just the way it is, anyone that works or has worked in IT will tell you that.

If you are a tech then you will enjoy the challenge of fixing whatever it breaks but if you fall into the second catagory, you are in for some serious headaches and frustration whilst awaiting the patch releases.

I would steer clear from it for a while until it has been tested on other guinea pigs

littleFella · 03-06-2006, 10:26 PM

Rule of thumb #1: You don't run the first release of a Microsoft OS. Wait for the first SP

Rule of thumb #2: If you current hardware works well with current Windows version, it won't do so well with the new version.

Mong · 03-07-2006, 01:13 AM

IMHO it might run but you must have to replace your monitor to enjoy graphics of Vista

veridicus · 03-07-2006, 11:33 AM

I've written up some details on Microsoft Windows Vista hardware requirements. I believe everyone should drop Windows. Read the rest of Microsoft Versus to find out why.

Zap · 03-07-2006, 06:41 PM

I found it interesting that M$ is offering 6 different versions on Vista when they release it! 6!

I personally think there should be around 42 different release versions of Vista. That would give us a wide enough choice in features and pricing! I think they should also offer a 43rd version of Vista. That version would offer zero security holes and zero bugs.
(It would, of course, cost twice as much as the next lowest Vista package, but worth the $1200, I think!)

**cldnails** · 03-07-2006, 06:50 PM

I would imagine there will be plenty of tweaks available once vista comes out that will allow you to run at pretty much any resolution you want. Especially a resolution that popular that is still pretty much standard on computer packages from like Dell.

The only concern I would have will be running it on a 32meg chip instead of a new 64. Might want to get a new processor, but everything else should handle it. Of course, this is based on pre-release information.

Zap · 03-07-2006, 06:55 PM

I ran the beta on a standard P4-1.7GHz. It ran OK. It sure looks pretty!
(Yeah, I'm a geek.)

Phoenix Flame · 03-19-2006, 12:32 PM

I haven't seen Vista yet, can anyone give me a link for it?

veridicus · 03-20-2006, 08:53 AM

http://www.google.com/search?q=vista+screenshot

There are also a lot of pics on flickr.

You'll notice every flashy feature is "borrowed" from KDE and Mac OS X.

reteep · 03-22-2006, 06:59 AM

I've run it on a P4 3ghz 1,5GB RAM without big problems. However, I will upgrade my system before Vista for sure. Microsoft rescheduled the release anyway, it's now pointed to the beginning of 2007.

veridicus · 03-22-2006, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reteep

I will upgrade my system before Vista for sure.

You think it'll be worth the cost? They've removed many features. And it's just the OS. No apps will require it for a very long time. If developers listen to Microsoft and only develop on .NET then new apps will run on XP for a very very long time.

Ashish · 03-23-2006, 02:56 AM

personally i am not gonna touch vista till the 1st service pack coems out.. might go for vista ultimate after that though

DarrenC · 03-23-2006, 01:22 PM

Wouldn't worry about it - MS Vista has been delayed again until January 2007.

I'm glad that this time they are taking security seriously.

Darren

veridicus · 03-23-2006, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrenC

I'm glad that this time they are taking security seriously.

I hope you're being sarcastic. Microsoft has never taken security seriously. If they did they'd be fixing what's already broken. Windows 2000 was left with 65,000 known unfixed bugs. No one knows how many more XP still has.