My now ancient laptop ran Vista from the very beginning and I never had performance problems with it. But it had 2GB RAM which was pretty eccentric at the time.
2GB isn't really much these days. My university's computer suites run Windows 7 enterprise on 2GB of RAM and the computers run like a dog. Even my old Windows XP laptop from 2004 with 1GB is faster. I've seen Vista running on 1GB and it's like a snail taking part in the Olympics. My dad says you can never have too much RAM in a computer and I reckon he's right.
I have an Dell inspiron dual core 2GHz with 2MB RAM and it runs like a dog under Vista, I never use it anymore.
Windows 7 is def the best Windows OS so far only marred by the useless search function in explorer, but that's easily cured with Cubic Explorer.
Min requirement for Vista I would say 3GB and someone on here said the more ram the better, which I agree, but a good fast processor with plenty of ram is a must.
........
Windows 7 is def the best Windows OS so far only marred by the useless search function in explorer, but that's easily cured with Cubic Explorer.
I agree about W7. I wasn't looking forward to using it after XP, but when I bought my laptop 3 years ago I had no choice. I quickly learned to love it.
Though I never knew till now there was a search function in explorer ; I've always used the one in the start button.
Does make you wonder what sites he is visiting, that the firewall was blocking. Then again he doesn't have that worry any more.
Its not really sites thats doing it its programs. I had such problems running my xbox 360 because every day I used the console the firewall wouldnt let it.
It just kinda pissed me off how every time I went to play a game at times the firewall just refused it.
2GB isn't really much these days. My university's computer suites run Windows 7 enterprise on 2GB of RAM and the computers run like a dog. Even my old Windows XP laptop from 2004 with 1GB is faster. I've seen Vista running on 1GB and it's like a snail taking part in the Olympics. My dad says you can never have too much RAM in a computer and I reckon he's right.
I'd rather have enough RAM for my needs and use the saved money on new shoes.
How did I manage what? VMware creates virtual machines with the hardware specs you specify eg small amount of RAM for old OSs. I use the paid version that lets you have several guest OSs open at once (need plenty of RAM on host pc). You just install either via CD or (better) from iso.
The latest free VM player only allows 1 OS at a time, but is a load of fun if you still have your old W95 disk etc.
How did I manage what? VMware creates virtual machines with the hardware specs you specify eg small amount of RAM for old OSs. I use the paid version that lets you have several guest OSs open at once (need plenty of RAM on host pc). You just install either via CD or (better) from iso.
The latest free VM player only allows 1 OS at a time, but is a load of fun if you still have your old W95 disk etc.
re W95 W98 sounds - that was the bit I found hardest to achieve on VM.
What I meant was how did you manage to get hold of old versions of Windows to run in VMware? Did you have loads of old Windows disks lying around? I still have a Windows 2000 disk lying around and I'm thinking of installing it in VMware just to play around with it. I haven't really used it since 2005.
re VM - Yeah I keep old stuff. Just a warning that you need a bit of muscle to run VMs. I have mine on an overclocked 2600K with 8GB ram, although W2000 would need less resources. The old OSs only support older IE and old versions of Flash, so websites crash. Also I've not had much success with virtual Linux for some reason. I did manage to load Ubuntu but no others.
^^^ a nice collection you have there, brings back memories. If you look at all the clean lines in W3.11 it's probably where an inspiration for W8 came from. Or maybe not
I'd go for Windows ME. A rushed OS that was unstable almsot all teh time.
There's a reason that version was called Mistake Edition
Anyway I think 95, ME, Vista and 8 were/are the worst Windows versions. NT4 wasn't too good either unless you were a business user. It was rubbish for home users.
There's a reason that version was called Mistake Edition
Anyway I think 95, ME, Vista and 8 were/are the worst Windows versions. NT4 wasn't too good either unless you were a business user. It was rubbish for home users.
NT was for business users though so not meant to be any good for home users
NT was for business users though so not meant to be any good for home users
I know! My old XP desktop (bought in 2003) actually came with NT4 installed and one of my dad's colleagues had to install XP. The system was dual boot and it wasn't partitioned properly. I only found that out in late 2004 when I tried to upgrade the NT4 side to Windows 2000. It turned out I was trying to overwrite XP with 2000 and I screwed the machine up Took me the best part of a week to fix it
2GB isn't really much these days. My university's computer suites run Windows 7 enterprise on 2GB of RAM and the computers run like a dog. Even my old Windows XP laptop from 2004 with 1GB is faster. I've seen Vista running on 1GB and it's like a snail taking part in the Olympics. My dad says you can never have too much RAM in a computer and I reckon he's right.
Windows 7 will run ok with 2Gb of ram. If your University windows 7 machines runs like a dog then maybe they should get looked at. also maybe it is the software they are running or the network.
More ram is always good, that is why I stuck 8Gb in my computer, but not so much for windows, but for the software I run.
I am going to update to 16Gb at some point, but I will need to replace two of the sticks.
I'd go for Windows ME. A rushed OS that was unstable almsot all teh time.
ME? yeah maybe, but the original windows 98 was a bit iffy as well, when they done the second edition it was far better. i know someone who used to think ME was great and had no problems with it at all.
I think vista was not far behind ME to be honest, but I think a lot of the problem with vista was that it was out before the hardware was powerful enough to run it and so many compatibility problems. I updated my Laptop to vista, a week after I went back to windows XP, still got the vista disk, but the laptop runs Linux these days.
ME for me, my friend also bought it at the same time and neither of us could keep it working for more than a few weeks at a time. I went back to 95 for another year before getting XP.
I'm still using XP although I do have win7 installed on a second HD, I still only use it to play dx11 games.
Yes 4GB is enough. You can try to solve compatibility issues in W7 in 2 ways. A simple one is to run the offending programme in a compatibility mode, choose XP in the file properties. Or, if you have pro or ultimate, you can run it in XP mode, which is basically a virtual machine running a copy of XP. Which is probably not the best for games where high performance is required.
The system specs on this new PC are amd phenom 3.2ghz, 4GB of Ram 64 bit operating system on win 7 Pro
Is that sufficent to run all games at good speed? I have 4 slots with 2 slots used that have 2gb in each.
I have a game that needs 4 gb of ram which means I cant use VM virtual machine then? If you allocate the ram to the game or does it only need to use it when you use the operating system?.
I have a game that needs 4 gb of ram which means I cant use VM virtual machine then? If you allocate the ram to the game or does it only need to use it when you use the operating system?.
I don't think a VM running a game that needs 4GB ram is possible on that machine. Your host (normal) OS needs say 1GB+ , the VM needs ram to run (its a program), the guest OS needs its own ram - that don't leave much left for the game. Might be ok with 8GB ram installed. Also 4GB for a game implies 64 bit guest OS. Not all cpus support 64 bit VM guest OSs eg my 2600K does not do the required virtualization for 64 bit VM, although I believe the plain (non K) 2600 does.
Games are a bit cpu demanding and may not be suitable for VM (as above the host OS needs cpu cycles and so does the guest) - I'm not a gamer, so maybe another DS member could advise on that.
Comments
2GB isn't really much these days. My university's computer suites run Windows 7 enterprise on 2GB of RAM and the computers run like a dog. Even my old Windows XP laptop from 2004 with 1GB is faster. I've seen Vista running on 1GB and it's like a snail taking part in the Olympics. My dad says you can never have too much RAM in a computer and I reckon he's right.
With that amount of RAM, I'm not surprised.
When did you buy that computer? 1990? :eek:
only 2gb ram, but I installed windows 7 and it runs fine.
Its only used for online catch up services and watching movie files on vlc media player... So I don't really push it to the max
I agree about W7. I wasn't looking forward to using it after XP, but when I bought my laptop 3 years ago I had no choice. I quickly learned to love it.
Though I never knew till now there was a search function in explorer ; I've always used the one in the start button.
Its not really sites thats doing it its programs. I had such problems running my xbox 360 because every day I used the console the firewall wouldnt let it.
It just kinda pissed me off how every time I went to play a game at times the firewall just refused it.
I'd rather have enough RAM for my needs and use the saved money on new shoes.
The latest free VM player only allows 1 OS at a time, but is a load of fun if you still have your old W95 disk etc.
http://www.vmware.com/products/player/
re W95 W98 sounds - that was the bit I found hardest to achieve on VM.
What I meant was how did you manage to get hold of old versions of Windows to run in VMware? Did you have loads of old Windows disks lying around? I still have a Windows 2000 disk lying around and I'm thinking of installing it in VMware just to play around with it. I haven't really used it since 2005.
I'd go for Windows ME. A rushed OS that was unstable almsot all teh time.
type 'win' to start from DOS
http://s22.postimg.org/sajvyn3kh/3_11a.jpg
Solitaire game was there
http://s22.postimg.org/ut5kzbpap/3_11b.jpg
shutdown message
http://s22.postimg.org/spzr5eevl/3_11c.jpg
and we all thought that was fantastic space-age stuff.
There's a reason that version was called Mistake Edition
Anyway I think 95, ME, Vista and 8 were/are the worst Windows versions. NT4 wasn't too good either unless you were a business user. It was rubbish for home users.
NT was for business users though so not meant to be any good for home users
I know! My old XP desktop (bought in 2003) actually came with NT4 installed and one of my dad's colleagues had to install XP. The system was dual boot and it wasn't partitioned properly. I only found that out in late 2004 when I tried to upgrade the NT4 side to Windows 2000. It turned out I was trying to overwrite XP with 2000 and I screwed the machine up Took me the best part of a week to fix it
Windows 7 will run ok with 2Gb of ram. If your University windows 7 machines runs like a dog then maybe they should get looked at. also maybe it is the software they are running or the network.
More ram is always good, that is why I stuck 8Gb in my computer, but not so much for windows, but for the software I run.
I am going to update to 16Gb at some point, but I will need to replace two of the sticks.
ME? yeah maybe, but the original windows 98 was a bit iffy as well, when they done the second edition it was far better. i know someone who used to think ME was great and had no problems with it at all.
I think vista was not far behind ME to be honest, but I think a lot of the problem with vista was that it was out before the hardware was powerful enough to run it and so many compatibility problems. I updated my Laptop to vista, a week after I went back to windows XP, still got the vista disk, but the laptop runs Linux these days.
I'm still using XP although I do have win7 installed on a second HD, I still only use it to play dx11 games.
Is 4 gb of ram enough for win 7?
Is that sufficent to run all games at good speed? I have 4 slots with 2 slots used that have 2gb in each.
I have a game that needs 4 gb of ram which means I cant use VM virtual machine then? If you allocate the ram to the game or does it only need to use it when you use the operating system?.
Games are a bit cpu demanding and may not be suitable for VM (as above the host OS needs cpu cycles and so does the guest) - I'm not a gamer, so maybe another DS member could advise on that.