Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Releases Vista Hardware Requirements
Digital Inspiration writes "CNet reports that Microsoft has kicked off a 'Get Ready' campaign aimed at helping customers prepare for Windows Vista. The site also includes an Upgrade Advisor tool to help people determine just how Vista-ready an existing PC is." From the article: "The marketing programs and upgrade tool are designed to ease some of the uncertainty around Vista well ahead of the back-to-school and holiday shopping seasons, the two biggest PC selling times of the year. Vista had long been expected to arrive by the 2006 holidays, but Microsoft said in March that it would not arrive on store shelves until January."
On both, things run perfectly, with all gui features, XGL, aqua effects, etc etc.
(ducks!)
Seriously - 1GB ram (512MB for low end installs) seems like an awful lot to me....
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
That's assuming that it ever comes out!!!!
I think I'm gonna take a pass on this one.
Is it just me, or is having stringent hardware requirements for the OPERATING SYSTEM kind of ridiculous?
Real programmers can write assembly code in any language. -- Larry Wall
I thought helping people get ready for these kinds of events involved saying something along the lines of "I'm sorry" or "There's no easy way to say this ..."
...I thought 640k was good enough for anybody?
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
But the "features" they are announcing have been in Mac OS X for four years. I'm not seeing anything impressive here... just insane memory and disk space requirements.
As computers advance it only makes sense to use the power that is becoming available.
There is a lot people expect their system to do out of the box. Computers are not going to be confined to one room in a house, they are going to be central to a lot of electronics throughout homes soon. It only make sense, most electronic items these days are very close to computers themselves, just specialized. Look at HD-DVD and Blu-Ray machines.
Hell with the attitude you have why would we have ever wanted more than text based graphics? Let alone more than 640k ram?
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
How many people will buy Vista-ready PC's but not actually bother to buy it when it comes out? Too many. Non-technical types who make up a good number of Windows users will not bother to upgrade past what they get with their computer at purchase time.
Unless MS bundle coupons for Vista with Windows XP this buying season, they can forget about people making any effort to do buy it and do the upgrade.
Come on people, Vista was not meant to be run on a wristwatch, toaster, calculator, or anything similar. The minimum requirements are on par with what any person who would want Vista in the first place would have. Seriously, if you're using a PII-350, you're just not using it for anything that would require Vista anyways. Am I nutz?
http://religiousfreaks.com/Windows XP to run, and won't install on Windows 2K systems. Hrmmmm. How helpful.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
I have a three year old Centrino laptop here and it said it would work with everything. I wonder if this is bottom of the barrel requirements and if it'll be silly slow.
Centrino 1.6Ghz, 2gigs of ram, nvidia 5700 card, 60gig drive.
I almost died when I saw that they want 15gb free hard drive space just for the OS. How much bloatware is in this one?
And on top of that, its 15gb, and you still have to buy office separately (for an absurd additional fee, of course!)
>sigh
They want us to buy the hardware in order to run their operating system, when an operating system is supposed to run our hardware. Like people are going to buy hardware just to run the new Windows. That's like buying an airplane because Geico comes out with airplane insurance. I find that appalling
My name is Wootzor von Leetenhaxor
I know that OS X 10.4 runs like complete ass with 512mb of RAM and a couple applications open (and don't pretend it doesn't!). I just think this will force computer manufacturers to slap more ram in the cheapo models. 1 gig isn't terribly expensive at all anymore. And by the time Vista is FINALLY released, it will be even cheaper... :)
I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
Vista is Raising the Bar for computer hardware. With higher spec computers flooding the market, I'm looking forward to cheaper components. With 1GB of Ram becoming the norm, imagine the price of those 512MB/256MB sticks :)
I was hoping they'd make overclocking to 4 GHz a REQUIREMENT just to weed out the, you know, users.
"Vista,Vista,Vista! Why is it always about Vista?"
OH YAY! Look everyone, a 11.7MB program that simply checks a few things on your computer, then tells you the result! I could have done this better with a couple dozen if statements:
if(installed ram min requirement) cout "NEED MORE RAM"
if(free HD space min requirement) cout "NEED MORE HD SPACE"
etc, etc
Does anyone know why this program takes up 11.7MB after installation?
Chums up, let's do this!
My oldest machine that would meet those specifications was built in January 2001 - Athlon 1200, 512MB RAM, Geforce 2 Ultra 64MB video card, and (now dead) 60GB DeathStar HD. At the time it was fairly top end. It obviously won't be running Aero, but hey, 5 years old (6 by the time Vista gets here) and still able to run it ain't too bad.
because of MS plans to reward their patient Vista customers with an added software bonus...
A free copy of Duke Nukem Forever with each Vista sale. (Since they should be both released at about the same time.)
"Upgrade your CPU
800 MHz required to install Windows Vista (Your computer currently has 0.00 Hz)"
I get great performance to have such a slow clock speed.
Insert Generic Sig Here:
FTFA: "There's really no reason to wait until the launch of Windows Vista to start shopping for a PC that can deliver a great Windows Vista experience or to start thinking about upgrading your current PC to windows Vista," product manager Greg Amrofell said in a telephone interview. In other words, go out and buy a new PC for around $1000, spending around $350 for XP that comes with your new PC, without realizing you're paying that M$ tax, then buy Vista for $(God-knows, let's say $500?) in a year's time! Brilliant! I LOVE my new mac - it has all these features AND I'm not running windows!
========
77 77 77 2e 6d 65 6c 76 69 6e 73 2e 63 6f 6d
By the time Vista is released, 1 Gig will seem like nothing. We will have 1 gig chips implanted into our brains just so that we can remember where our flying car was parked.
I'll probably be modded down for this...
People bought Windows 98 in masses, even though I can't think of a single person who wanted it over Windows 95.
Get Ready.. for huge licensing costs! Get Ready.. for 10 new bugs per feature! Don't get ready.. get Linux.
How the heck am I supposed to upgrade from GNU/Linux to Vista??
Because it's Microsoft these are the specs you can expect to see on new PC's. No PC manufacturer is going to keep ordering PC's that don't meet these specs. Prices will likely go up, but they go up whenever a new OS is released. People will pay because they don't know any better and want the absolute latest, and they'll get burned for it with all the unpatched holes, but Vista will eventually become a standard, although I think people are beginning to realize that Microsoft might not be who they want to trust their computer to so this process will happen more slowly than it has in the past.
I've always pictured the color of OS zealotry as a sort of bright flamingo pinkish hue
I know I'm a mac biggot...
I'll have you know, that round here the correct term is 'mac fanboy' (or whiney mac fanboy if you prefer).
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
The story is the reqs. You couldn't be bothered to cut and paste the requirements? You had to just grab some crap paragraph that highlights the crappy info we've already known for months?
Weak. Just weak.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
I suspect that technical types (at least developers) will more likely "not bother" to upgrade than non-technical types. In fact, I still run Windows 2000 on a number of my development machines on purposes. My reasoning is that older versions are more of a "lowest common denominator", and if I develop on them, my programs are more likely to work on more platforms. Gamer types, if you can call them technical, will probably upgrade at a higher rate than others, though.
my blog
I've already tossed Microsoft Windows out the Window.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
This is a startlingly absent point from most windows discussions.
Will the current Generation of Macs meet these requirements?
Yeah, "Get Ready" to get hit in your wallet, find out (WHENEVER this "thing" actually ships) that you bought the wrong stuff and have to go buy more...
A nightmare.
Eh...that spec looks like something needed for some lastest games. Seriously?
...exactly why I should upgrade? Sure, in five years or even sooner I'm going to want a program that won't run in XP. But why before then?
What advantages does Vista have over XP? All I've seen is that they're making "transparent windows" and it seems like they would only piss me off. They're going to have dialog boxes come up saying something like "are you really really sure you want to install Winamp? It might be a virus or spyware, you know!" Again, not a feature I want.
Please, one of you astroturfers, tell me WHY I need a new OS (and it seems a new computer to run it on)?
It's bated breath.
You're not nuts, but I wonder how much of a dog the "Capable" machine will be.
A Windows Vista Capable PC includes at least:
* A modern processor (at least 800MHz).
* 512 MB of system memory.
* A graphics processor that is DirectX 9 capable.
Also, I don't find the memory requirement to be out of line with Mac OS X 10.4 or the upcoming 10.5 (Leopard). Leopard will most likely have a minimum RAM requirement of 512 MB as well.
That's not an upgrade, it's a downgrade. MS has never been very good at doing that...
Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
Its an upgrade advisor, not a downgrade advisor.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
a 20GB hard drive with 15GB of free space
... they have gone insane ... I bet ya I could almost put every linux distro on a 15GB multi-boot machine with that much space ... How can they use that all on 1 OS?
For what? seriously
So I have to install more software just to see if my computer is ready for Vista?
My Mac's apparently not ready for Vista or the Microsoft web site. Their "Get Ready" page doesn't work in Safari. Most of their sites work in Safari, so I don't know why they'd make this one render so terribly.
What if a Mac user wants to consider switching?
Hahaha... Ok, I guess not. Just a thought.
Developers: We can use your help.
Apparently the first requirement is to not use Firefox. The page doesn't load in Firefox on my Linux box (seems to work on my Windows box though).
Why is "audio output capability" required?
This space intentionally left blank.
Let's say you're a company. You just bought 500 workstations from Dell last year, they are Pentium IV 2.1 Ghz machines with 512 MB of Ram (plenty for your company). You need to keep up with Microsoft Operating Systems because Microsoft will drop support for the OS version you currently use. Now you have to decide to "upgrade" to the older version of the OS or this new Vista thing. But wait, Vista has more stringent hardware requirements. Now as a manager do you buy more hardware (which has no appreciable value) or do you upgrade to an OS that may drop support in under 5 years or do you switch OS vendors altogether?
It's not as easy a decision as most people think.
crazy dynamite monkey
That is entirely good because you will be running Linux and get a hell of a good box for vanilla prices.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Maybe they can do it like a magic ticket promotion. Like one in ten has the coupon for free upgrade. And then you could have a grand prize ticket that entitled you to a tour of the chocolate factory with Bill being your personal tour guide.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Talking about Windows upgrades is just silly.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
15 GB Free HD Space! Are you kidding me. My machine at work takes up 8.6 GB! Thats OS + Apps + Data. WTF requires 15 GB! Is Microsoft including Porn to show off Aero!!
So how the fuck am I going to get my toast just the way I like it?! XP? Sorry, but I'm not going to eat any virus laden toast, not if I can help it.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Okay, everybody is missing the point. Vista does not have a HD foorprint of 15GB. Really, it doesn't. Nor does it plan to use 1GB of memory for the kernel.
The "system" requirements are set to provide the average user with a pleasant experience (the use of Windows notwithstanding). That means several applications open and multimedia running in the background and/or foreground. Yes, there will be lots of clock cycles and memory for pretty (and useless). This isn't about the minimum requirements for an OS, its about the minimum requirements for the OS and a typical group of applications.
For you Mac fanboys out there - yes, Tiger will install with 3GB of HD free and will run on a G3. I don't know this as fact, but based on what I know Vista will easily fit into 3GB as well with room to spare. It will also run on an 800MHz x86 processor which...wait for it...came out the same year as the G3 was introduced (1999).
I know it's popular to get your panties all bunched up over the evil empire's latest move to try and get you to pimp your little sister for enough money to upgrade, but this really isn't that bad. I mean, this is the same place where we discuss whether it's enough to have dual 512MB video cards to play the latest game on our machines, right? Are we really that worried that we're not going to have 40GB of hard drive and a gig of RAM?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Maybe it's just me, but there sure seems to be a whole lot of complaining about specs from a group of people whom I would have thought would keep an up-to-date system. If you have attempted to play a 'purty' game within the last couple of years, 1 gig was pretty much standard fare for memory. 128 meg for a video card is on the low end of the spectrum as well. I really can't even remember the last time I had below a 1GHz processor, and I don't consider myself a 'hardcore' gamer as such.
;) Really, though... whats 40 gigs when you can buy 500 gig drives pretty cheap anymore?
The 40gig drive, on the other hand... time to prioritize my pr0n and clean some space up
The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel...
Now that Vista's getting so bloaty, perhaps it will be even slower than WINE. Imagine finding that the faster way to run your Vista apps is on WINCE. Now that would be cool!
Engineering is the art of compromise.
You will need at least a 1GB NIC also to allow the worms/spam and trojans to be more efficient.
On a side note, does the spinning hourglass speed up (i.e. rotations, not time...) when it decides to bomb out?
Windows does an awfull lot more then just sit between you and the hardware.
One of the reasons IE boots faster then Firefox is because firefox doesn't know it is going to run until you tell it too and then has to do all of its getting ready. IE is already pre-loaded, ready to be used. (By anyone wishing to bot your machine)
1gig may sound like a lot but as an owner of a linux P3x2 512mb machine I can tell you that it is not extreme. I constantly run against the fact that my PC has to swap and if I could add another 512mb for less then the entire machine cost me I would (it uses the evil intel ram whatever it is called)
Granted if Vista itself REALLY needs the full 1gig you are going to need at minimum 2gig to game and possible more. There are already plenty of games wich prefer more then a gig on W2K3 (my gaming rig).
It might shock you but I think if you are a gamer and your game is going to be vista only you might want to bite the bullet and get a 4gig machine.
Damn. Then again, my current vidcard for my gaming machine got the same amount of memory as my desktop pc. And yes I am old enough to have had harddisks a fraction that size. Oh okay I am old enough to have had harddisks with less space then a PSP satisfied?
I am kinda amazed however that it only requires a 1gig processor. With overclocking my P3 can reach that. Odd.
That more then anything suggests to me that Vista is a bit bloated. What the hell are they loading into memory that doesn't require CPU power to process but does have to be in main memory?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Some PC manufacturers skimp badly on RAM, even though it's cheap. Insufficient RAM is one of the few things that will make a modern computer perform badly as a desktop. By saying "Windows Vista requires 1GB RAM", Microsoft is really saying "manufacturers, stop giving users only 256MB!" Obviously Windows itself won't use 1GB of memory, but some applications will, and poor performance makes Microsoft (as well as the PC manufacturer) look bad.
As for the 128MB video card requirement, this is another area where PC manufacturers are overly stingy. Developers shouldn't have to worry about substandard integrated graphics chipsets, they should be able to program to a reasonable lowest common denominator. Microsoft wants to make sure no one is below that common denominator.
Basically, Microsoft is claiming as hardware requirements, not what Windows itself needs, but what they think programmers should be able to take for granted. It's all cheap hardware anyways, and it will only get cheaper in the future, so leaving some old systems unsupported is no big deal in the long run.
My laptop doubles as a toaster and its pretty new. I freakin' better be able to run Vista.
You could always upgrade to FreeBSD. *ducks*
(not so) Gentlemen, start your flamewars!
home
There is no way my bank could afford to go to Windows Vista ... 500 computers ... most of which are barely making the minimum requirements for Windows XP ... before my bank could even move to Windows Vista we're talking about re-hauling our entire supply of workstations ... will never happen ... wow!
I, for one, am crossing my fingers with excitement that once Vista really gets rolling, Ubuntu and the ilk will be that much further ahead from where they are now. I really don't see why I want or need Vista compared to my perfectly fine XP install. The OS requires a gaming video card?!? The OS uses that much disk space?!? That much basic RAM requirements? How much resources do you need to run Office and browse the internet (which is what 90% of the computers are going to do)??? Do you need fancy looking windows when you're typing an email? The whole thing just seems like a fluffy waste.
:-)
Maybe I'll be surprised, or change my tune, but at this point in time I don't see myself dropping XP until it doesn't do what I need it to do....and when that time comes, here's hoping the linux (or Mac?) scene is at a point where they (well, linux anyway...the Mac is just pricey) are truly a competitive option. It seems as both Vista and the PS3 have jumped the shark
Providing minimum specs that mean "Minimum for reasonable performance" not "Minimum to make it execute." I remember back in the dark days of DOS games were famous for using the second metric. They'd list a minimum and sure, the game would execute on that system, but it wasn't really playable. I much prefer companies to list realistic minimums that will give reasonable performance. Absolute minimums aren't really useful.
Hanging is too good for you. I sentence you to ten years of Windows ME support.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
How are they going to download an extra-large bottle of aspirin over the 'net? Surely that would be the most important component of any "Get ready for Vista!" kit, wouldn't it?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I have a great modern OS also, and it was free! Also, I built my own box, to a grand total of about $800. I run Linux.
Meh.
Does this mean Microsoft is about to reel me in?
...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
You're actually suggesting that Microsoft would negotiate a deal where you had to pay for things you don't actually need or want, in order to get something you do? Whatever. I'll believe that when I see it.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
I grow tired of people making this reference because it's just not true.
Now, it also stands to reason you may think this is fanboi speak which it is not. I changed to kde after starting with xfce and I see very little performance difference.
I've done two 3.x+1 upgrades of KDE just wishing the old dog would die so I have an excuse to replace it. Surprisingly each version is noticeably faster than the last.
Mind you the usual suspects are quite slow to start, OOO, GIMP regardless of the DE but once everything is up, it goes well.
FYI: I'm running it on a pII 233 256mb just fine. I think your P90 reference is too harsh.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
That won't be that cheap. Especially since to add a gig you need to have your 1 gig not spread out over all your memory banks. This is rare.
1gig is a lot for a minimum spec.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
That made me laugh a bit. What are the odds, you think? When it actually PlaysSometimes is there an actionable claim in there ?
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
It's bated breath. BATED! Meaning "stopped" or "held", like "abated". NOT BAITED!
What the hell would "baited breath" even MEAN? STOP SAYING THAT!
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
This is on a Windows 2000 SP4 box, Athlon 3500+, 2GB ram, DVD-ROM, DVD-Recorder, CD-R, 120GB hd (OS), 250GB hd (data), Geforce 6600(?). Obviously my system can handle it. But I can't "upgrade" directly to Vista (not that I would want to, unless some good games will only run on it)? Bullshit.
C:\>
"Linux can run perfectly fine on 256MB with old AGP and a K6/2, sir."
Future Windows memory requirements are measured in chairs....
Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
"System Compatibility Status
Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor could not run Winsat. System compatibility status could not be evaluated. "
Belief is the currency of delusion.
I tried with a quad pentium pro 200mhz server I had. You can get it to run most definitely but it will not be a happy experience. Fortunately it was just for giggles, I wiped the whole thing and put Gentoo on. It's been my firewall/file server ever since. That was about 5 years ago btw so KDE might be faster. You're not the first person I've heard say that about it.
Really, with so many great free choices (Ubuntu, Mepic, PCLinuxOS, etc...) why are people getting all concerned about how much the next version of Windows is going to cost or what system requirements it has? If you are a home user, you owe it to yourself to get the best, get Linux!
Meh.
Something like this: The Audio Scream of Death?
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
Fine, keep me from learning about the product. That'll show me.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
So I'll be able to upgrade from XP to Vista for free? If not, well... that would definitely be a reason. I know $136 isn't a lot to MS bigwigs, but it is to me.
Secondly, am I the only one that noticed that FarCry requires less of a system than Vista does? Holy Crap!!!
FarCry:
Minimum Requirements: 1GHz P3 or Athlon 256MB RAM 64MB 3D card 4GB hard drive space
Recommended Requirements: 2GHz P4 or Athlon XP 2000+ 512MB RAM 128MB DirectX 9.0 3D card
I can run XP AND a 3D game with less hardware than Vista with some visual effects turned on. OMG!
Swoogan
sigs are for losers...and ppl who can think of one.
Maybe M$ should have started out... by asking the Users what they want!
They haven't done that in more than 15 years, why should they start now?
First requirement is to have Internet Explorer, that page doesn't load correctly in mozilla based browsers. Are they just ignoring standards again? However most of pages at microsoft.com works.
Pixel image editor - http://www.kanzelsberger.com
With a high-end overclocked Pentium 4, and a little creativity with your case and a wireframe tray... and sliced bread... you might be able to make toast with Vista.
Last time I checked, a bare version of a Dell machine costs more without the OS, and an OEM version of XP was going for $90 to $115 (full retail versions for $100 more). Most upgrades at full retail are around $100 (Pro version for twice that).
So, if you spend that $90 for the OEM version today with you're new PC, then drop another $200 for the whole-enchilada upgrade next January, I'm guessing you'll still be quite a distance away from the $850 you're afraid of spending.
(PS - Newegg sells Tiger for $109, right alongside XP for that $90 to $115 quoted above)
Come on people, Vista was not meant to be run.
Truer words have seldom been spoken.
Edith Keeler Must Die
the hypothetical machines you describe meet the requirements to run Vista - the manager takes a vacation in Hawaii....
"But this one goes to 11!"
you'll need a Beowulf of those.
(hic) I apologise in advance..I have a nice cab sav on the go here..I also apologise for the line length, thanks to /.'s bastard line-length filter
.exe's a bot-netting,
Seven Service Packs a-swimming,
Six Execs a-lying,
Five Unnecessary Things,
Four Calling-home Apps,
Three Zero-Day Exploits,
Two Trusted Computing Platforms
And A promise that was empty
.exe's a bot-netting,
Seven Service Packs a-swimming,
Six Execs a-lying,
Five Unnecessary Things,
Four Calling-home Apps,
Three Zero-Day Exploits,
Two Trusted Computing Platforms
And A promise that was empty
.exe's a bot-netting,
Seven Service Packs a-swimming,
Six Execs a-lying,
Five Unnecessary Things,
Four Calling-home Apps,
Three Zero-Day Exploits,
Two Trusted Computing Platforms
And A promise that was empty
.exe's a bot-netting,
Seven Service Packs a-swimming,
Six Execs a-lying,
Five Unnecessary Things,
Four Calling-home Apps,
Three Zero-Day Exploits,
Two Trusted Computing Platforms
And A promise that was empty
.exe's a bot-netting,
Seven Service Packs a-swimming,
Six Execs a-lying,
Five Unnecessary Things,
Four Calling-home Apps,
Three Zero-Day Exploits,
Two Trusted Computing Platforms
And hardware requirements too steep for me!
On the first day of beta, MS sent to me A promise that was empty
On the second day of beta, MS sent to me Two Trusted Computing Platforms And A promise that was empty
On the third day of beta, MS sent to me Three Zero-Day Exploits,
Two Trusted Computing Platforms And A promise that was empty
On the fourth day of beta, MS sent to me Four Calling-home Apps, Three Zero-Day Exploits, Two Trusted Computing Platforms And A promise that was empty
On the fifth day of beta, MS sent to me Five Unnecessary Things, Four Calling-home Apps, Three Zero-Day Exploits, Two Trusted Computing Platforms And A promise that was empty
On the sixth day of beta, MS sent to me Six Execs a-lying, Five Unnecessary Things, Four Calling-home Apps, Three Zero-Day Exploits, Two Trusted Computing Platforms And A promise that was empty
On the seventh day of beta, MS sent to me Seven Service Packs a-swimming, Six Execs a-lying, Five Unnecessary Things, Four Calling-home Apps, Three Zero-Day Exploits, Two Trusted Computing Platforms And A promise that was empty
On the eighth day of beta, MS sent to me Eight
On the ninth day of beta, MS sent to me Nine Lawyers dancing, Eight
On the tenth day of beta, MS sent to me Ten Shills a-leaping, Nine Lawyers dancing, Eight
On the eleventh day of beta, MS sent to me Eleven programmers pissed-off, Ten Shills a-leaping, Nine Lawyers dancing, Eight
On the twelfth day of beta, MS sent to me Twelve DRM devices, Eleven programmers pissed-off, Ten Shills a-leaping, Nine Lawyers dancing, Eight
I am going to burn in karma hell for that prob..
Am I the only one who noticed that? "... Adequate graphics memory. 64 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor less than 1,310,720 pixels 128 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions from 1,310,720 to 2,304,000 pixels 256 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions higher than 2,304,000 pixels Meets graphics memory bandwidth requirements, as assessed by Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor running on Windows XP ..."
I guess Microsoft will start asking users to count their pixels one by one.. but what for the bandwith requirements?
Is they don't want people bitching. They want to give you some realistic requirements. If you follow their guide, you'll get pretty good performance including when you are running apps.
Remember the Windows 95 fiasco? MS claimed it required 4MB of RAM. Ok, that's not a lie, Windows 95 will execute on a system with 4MB of RAM... It's just nothing else will. The OS would use all the RAM, and you'd be paging continually, it was too slow to be usable. You needed 8MB of RAM to have a Windows 95 system that could usuably load apps.
These requirements are much more realistic ones. They aren't the requirements to execute Vista, they are the requirements to execute Vista, and things on top of it, which is of course the point to having an OS. Consumers who listen to the guildelines will likely not be disappointed.
I will continue to run UBUNTU and Win2KPro on all my PCs. I quess if they come out with PC games that do not run on Win2K I may have download a copy. Everything else I run is on Linux. Or just play games on consoles from now on.
Science is the Real TRUTH!
HW people just enjoy this ... it's their bread. Billions of lines of code to think for YOU ... that co$t$ !!!
Whether he realizes it or not, the parent struck upon a key facet of the new operating system.
When touting the XBox 360 and its Live service, Microsoft also pushed the concept of 'Live Anywhere'. The ability for gamers to continue their games on the PC and on portables. This will likely be pushed via Vista, and not their previous OS offerings.
Microsoft is trying to conquer the gaming sphere by offering the computer as the 'high-priced challenger' to the current consoles, while still having their 360 and offering interactivity between the two.
Whether this is good or bad is an exercise for the individual reader.
Why are you acting surprised? Vista will run on much less stellar machines. These requirements are there becase:
1) Microsoft wants people to have a reason to upgrade, so that OEMs are happy, and will stick to Windows rather than start selling cheap machines with a free OS preinstalled - the single pillar that will singlehandedly ensure that Bill's Empire will not fall anytime soon.
2) To ensure that people will have acceptable performance even after they install hundreds of bloated applications, firewalls, virus scanners, adware scanners, Bonzi Buddy screensavers, free wallpaper switchers, device drivers thinking their hardware is the most important component in the system, Viruses, Infections, Spyware, Trojans, Adware, and last but not least least, Microsoft Office.
That said, I still make some money fixing XP machines that are mainframes compared to what you were supposed to have back when Windows Xtra Profit came out, so nothing is new.
Vanilla X *runs* just fine at my house on several different PPro/200 systems with 4MB Matrox Milleniums. Remember those? The systems have 12MB VooDoo2 cards, also, but I don't use those cards with X.
I use XFree86 under various Linux distros, XFree86/2 under OS/2, and both HobLink X11 and Hummingbird eXceed under OS/2. Also MI/X under Windows 95.
All of them are quite fast on the above hardware.
Now, some window managers and desktop environment can slow things down a tad...
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Or maybe that's how things are supposed to be? Maybe what Microsoft wants to convince Joe User is that: "You'll need to upgrade so much anyway, why not wait a little and buy a whole new PC with Vista preinstalled?"
People that are going to use vista probably don't have equipment below these specs, you are correct there.
But why would the operating system REQUIRE these specs? If it requires this much hardware then it's probably even more bloated and inefficient than previous windows releases. Not that this should be a surprise to most people.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
That's always been something that annoys me is companies that cheapskate on RAM and people that refuse to upgrade. My personal current scale is 256MB of RAM is the minimum for XP, 512MB is what I recommend for office work and 1GB or more for games. Well XP doesn't actually NEED 256MB of RAM, it'll run on a system with 64MB, maybe less. However you are paging any time you do anything, it's too slow to be usable. 256MB is the minimum I find that the system is reasonably responsive with.
Given the size of apps these days I think 512MB minimum/1GB recommend is a perfectly reasonable standard for Vista. Please remember people 2GB of DDR2 RAM is currently about $130 aftermarket. There's not any good excuse for not having enough RAM. If you have an older system, that's fine, don't expect it to run the latest OS with all the bells and whistles. I am not going to try and load a 2006 (or 2007 more like) OS on a 1996 computer and expect it to work.
Me Culpa, I looked here and read bottom up to find G3...mistook it for G3 pro. Oh well, they're both old hardware (and by old, I should clarify that I mean "fully depreciated by the standards of the US Internal Revenue Service").
I stand corrected.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I've run 10.4 reasonably well with 128MB. Right now I'm using 384MB and it runs great. This machine has an 800MHz G3. If you are having problems with 512MB, maybe you should take a look at the processes you are running. You probably have too many background applications running that you don't know about. Also, try replacing the RAM. I had a slow system that tested good. When I replaced the RAM, it got a lot faster. No increase, just new RAM.
just kidding
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
That's a lot of expensive hardware just to have a shitty OS crashing every ten minutes...no thanks.
Ubuuuntuuuuuuuuu
What the heck is a "beowulf cluster"?
I guess I'll never know if I'm ready or not. It requires .NET to run and every time I've installed that my network stack has crashed reliably every 10 minutes. Joy.
I guess I'll just have to upgrade to something less "crashy".
-- your Web browser is Ronald Reagan
I'm getting one of the new 20" screen CoreDual 2GHz iMacs. They run really fast, they can use Bootcamp with XP for games, and the Mac OS X side has all the great productivity stuff I need and the stability to Windows can't give me.
I'm sorry, but when enough people go on and on and on about how bad Windows is maybe you should consider something rather amazing. Maybe they're right! Wow! What a novel idea, thousands of computer users griping about Windows having all of these problems are right! That's amazing!
So, those of you who try to downplay the whole "evil empire" thing can go get Vista and DRM the hell out of yourself while we Mac users get respect from the company we buy our products from. You don't see Apple treating us as potential criminals require activation codes and Genuine Windows Verfication crap.
Michael "TheZorch" Haney
thezorch@gmail.com
http://thezorch.googlepages.com/home
1GB RAM will turn your laptop into a toaster ! Seriously 1GB RAM is just too high for most laptop batteries. As penance for their plan to turn my laptop into a culinary device could msft please re-divert say $1B from the Google war-chest to battery research? CyP
What is up with describing screen attributes in terms of pixels and not the resolution? Those assholes in Redmond just love to piss me off.
"Premium Ready" is this and this:
Oh yeah, and you paid a freaking Premium for what's going to be XP + 128MB RAM performance. 15 GB for the OS, 25 GB for Office, there's no room on this system for Linux now is there, chuckles Bill Gates to himself. Meanwhile, Mepis gives you all the same programs and features for a mere 2GB disk space and 128 MB of RAM, and not a lot of computer. I've run with a lot less.
Hot Air Graphics are here compared to KDE :
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
'cuz it definitely needs to be run on a "TREMENDOUS machine" ...
"But the "features" they are announcing have been in Mac OS X for four years"
I'm so tired of hearing this. So, apple shouldn't have created the ipod because Diamond Multimedia had a hard drive player for years? Firefox shouldn't have added tabs because Opera had them for years. Mac's shouldn't have added actual multi-tasking because windows had it for years.
Are these items not features just because they've been done before? Stop being so desperately elitist and just realize that everything evolves, companies and open-source projects all try to emulate items that work better and everyone benefits from a better experience.
With the new 128 mb minimum graphics card requirement, why do I suspect the OS will still be littered with 16 color icons for filetypes such as EXE, DRV, MSC, etc... Icons that MS made back in what, 1991? And the Windows Startup screen will still be a dithered 256 color (if that) ugly ass graphic that looks like it was made in paint.exe by a 7 year old.
Seriously, with all of the hype around Aero, one would think that at the very least MS could hire a building's worth of graphic designers to do something rigorously, and well, instead of hiring lord-knows-who to essentially copy the UI from os x. I can hear Bill Gates now, talking to the head of UI design... "Ok, well, I don't really care what you do think, just make it look like glass candy, like OS X!" Maybe if MS invested a modicum of resources or concern for quality design they might be a little better off. But 3d Task Manager? Give me a break.
It's always funny, any front page topic posted about Microsoft will always have /. script kiddie trolls, biggots, and fanboys posting comments like "OMGz!! Teh M$ bloat!" or the wonderful "Apple had these features two years ago. . ". What no one wants to mention is that both MacOS 10 and your typical distribution of Linux match Windows in size, and most of the features that Apple has added to MacOS 10, stragely enough, were either announced by Microsoft as new Vista features before Apple added them to MacOS, or were ripped off from other companies like Google. Then you have Linux, many applications for which blatantly copy Windows apps.
I doubt I'm the only person to make this observation. Microsoft bashing aside, is this crap as old for anyone else as it is to me? Find something else to complain about.
Rather than move to Vista, these people should seriously consider distributions like Mepis or Xandros. Both install in a snap and Xandros makes it easy to use Crossover Office for those few unfortunates who must still use M$ Word and other terminally kludged junk. I had a look at the Vista Ready page myself and here's are requirements and a feature compare with KDE, the desktop used by both distros. They work great on the computers your neighbors throw out too.
The Mac charge to X86 is starting to more G3s to the trash as well, and most of the same free software runs on them too.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Our company did last year, city of Vienna did, it should work out very nicely for you too. Our former XP users love KDE.
No need to put yourself through pains when you can improve security, save money and achieve some level of vendor independence all at the same time.
If thats the minimum requirements for vista, then whats the recommended..
I ask because the minimum requirements for Windows XP was 233mhz 64meg of ram, and yes i had once had a computer set up with those specs and to be honest Yes it ran, but it ran Bloody Terriable!!
I could image Windows Vista to run the same deal.
Something like 100%?
Unless MS bundle coupons for Vista with Windows XP this buying season, they can forget about people making any effort to do buy it and do the upgrade.
Unless that "upgrade" is "perfect" it's not going to happen even if they give it away. This is an issue M$ is familiar with and it's why they fight tooth and nail for their vendor choke hold. If a computer is not good enough to do what the user wants, they typically buy a new one. A computer a user gets used to is by definition good enough and they don't like moving. The easiest way to move a user is for the user to have two machines, one as a safety blanket. The world of non free software is so brittle, most users don't trust themselves to install an alternate text editor. An OS replacement is something most don't think possible.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
On both, things run perfectly, with all gui features, protected mode, CGA, VGA, stereo sound etc etc.
(ducks! gets smitten by a P-IV-heatsink, but modded '10, Interesting' at the same time =D)
Seriously - 1GB ram (512MB for low end installs) seems like an awful lot to me....
And when you gaze long enough into the code, the code will also gaze into you.
Well, I have lastest KDE running on a single processor 450 Mhz PIII right now -- an OpenBSD machine no less -- and it goes slick as snot. Bells and whistles on, bells and whistles off, I don't notice any difference. I have to say, I was very, very surprised. As long as you have memory to avoid swapping you are cruising. I have 512 MB, and currently 214 MB are free (this is with numerous applications sitting open, and 75 MB dedicated diskcache. Not great to be sure ... but not that bad by todays standards). For the record I have a 16 MB PCI video card and a cheap PCI soundblaster card.
If you can tell me something Vista actually does that people care about, I might understand that. Only Microsoft enthusiasts are going to buy "Premium Ready" Computers in the next six months and most of them won't bother to upgrade. This is all about marketing, nothing else.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Ok, fine .. the minimum requirements are a tad high but it probably means having all the eye candy turned off. Turn it off and you have the same system that ran XP.
That being said though, shouldn't there be a move towards getting OS's and Hardware to run on lower power requirments? The more RAM and CPU power used, the more electricity is needed. California has had its share of energy problems. And there's a limit of how much energy is to be had. It doesn't sound bad to the individual consumer buying one PC.... but there's millions of people potentially buying Vista.
Linux can run MS Money natively now?
I suspect that this will run on quite a low power CPU. Despite everyone's best efforts, OS tasks don't require that much number crunching power. I've noticed the main cause of slowdown in almost every system that's had a problem is lack of RAM. The suggested spec is probably just the lowest spec PC they botheres to test it on. You can't really get a PC with that low a processor speed any more. Entry level is about twice that.
I quit M$ six years ago - sure am glad I did.
I wonder if these are the requirements with x64 included. I noticed that when I recompiled for amd64 on gentoo that my memory usage increased dramatically and under heavy load (Java) 1 gb was barely cutting it.
Yes, Vista has higher hardware requirements. But look closely: those reqs are for Vista with all the eye candy. In a business, you won't need the bells and whistles, so you turn off Aero Glass and go with the much less demanding Silver theme.
Requires: Vista-capable - Premium Ready
Processor: Modern chip (at least 800MHz) - 1GHz 32-bit (x86)
or 64-bit (x64)
System memory: 512MB - 1GB
GPU: DirectX 9 capable (WDDM support recommended) - Runs Windows Aero
Graphics memory: (none specified) - 128MB
HDD: (none specified) - 40GB
HDD free space: (none specified) - 15GB
Optical drive: (none specified) - DVD-ROM drive
Note: Processor speed is the nominal operational chip frequency for the PC. The DVD-ROM for Premium Ready can be external.
Source: Microsoft
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The "Get Ready" page doesn't render properly in Opera. Coincidence? I think not.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Bud, keep it real. DOS runs in real mode, and AmigaOS never bothered to use the MMU facilities provided on post 680x0 (post 68000) to do address space or priviledge separation between OS and applications.
From the guide:
TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...
I don't get why the hardware requirements for an M$ OS & graphical environment nearly double every time they release a new product.
The Linux/Gnome folks seem to be focused on making their environments run FASTER with each release on the same hardware, not SLOWER.
Fire Windows, hire Linux.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
And my Amiga 500 ran with only 512KB (with a 'K') of RAM.
Of course, serious users upgraded to a Fatter Agnus to get the full 1MB -- *AND* the battery-backed clock!
OBESE!!! Good to see Microsoft is keeping up with American trends. Hard drive is not too much of an issue but the ram, 512MB- 1GB?? So, that means we are going to need 2Gigs to multitask efficiently. Imagine the problems with all those computer with integrated graphics and shared memory. Notebooks users are going to feel the pain there. Then, 128 MB video cards minimum with more ram needed for higher resolutions. Again, I think that is going to sting notebook users, graphics pros, users with IG chipsets, and anyone who needed that card to render something other than the GUI. In conclusion, read the sig!!!
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
I can't get over the idea that it requires 15 GB of hard drive space.
Heck, OS X comes in needing a measly "3GB of available hard disk space (4GB if you install the developer tools)" and most of the new features in VISTA were essentially stolen concepts from Apple, again...
Microsoft needs to give up on the backwards compatible bloatware concept and finally release a quick streamlined version of their OS. Faster processors and more memory shouldn't be what's required to run the OS faster every single time. Nobody cares if they can run Windows 98 software or not.
microsofts gonna do the same dmn thing they did with 2K. drop all software compatibility with old OS's and make users buy the new OS. Little thing like windows media player 10, the new internet explorer...everything new coming out is prolly gonna be vista only, and it is going to be very gay
It must have taken you an hour to put that post together, hunt down all the screenshots and whatnot. And for what? Like the other poster correctly points out, most of what you wrote is plain pointless FUD. What's the point? Do you think using lots of boldface and "M$" and insulting language gets you anything? What, is this some sort of evangelism effort? Geared towards whom? People on Slashdot? That's the one demographic you do not need to evangelize to!
What a sad thing. The more posts like these get modded up the more they appear in Slashdot's default page view and the more people form ideas about how the free software community cannot make an intelligent argument to save its collective life. No, instead we are obviously busy inventing crap and making pointless comparisons between Vista and KDE to give our lives a little meaning. Give me a break.
Go away. We don't need your help to defeat "M$".
Windows upgrades consistently rank among the top sellers on the Amazon.com software sales charts, almost always in the top 50, usually in the top 25. The XP Home Upgrade still sells very, very well, #23 at 7 PM ET.
With no significant discount off retail list. That's astonishing for an OS that has been the default OEM install for close on to five years.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.micro soft.com/windowsvista/
:-)
Looks like they have a bit more work to do before they can roll out the Windows Vista [website].
Slashdot.. where people join together in deliberate ignorance.
If you can fry an egg on a CPU, then it shouldn't be too hard to toast bread with your computer. A converted CD Rom drive aligned with the CPU might be made to accomodate a Pop-Tart...
That is significantly better than any experience you'd have on a Pentium 90 which is what we were discussing. A P3 450 is quite a bit faster especially with the much faster ram that it employs.
Yes, it's easy.
When Vista comes out, MS won't automatically drop support for XP. If history serves, XP will be supported for at least 6 to 8 more years.
Now, if you work for a company that needs 500 desktops (I do), you know you don't buy them. You get a leasing deal from Dell, that includes them taking your machines every 2-3 years and exchanging them with the new models. In this case, within 2-3 years you'll have new Vista-capable computers at no extra cost (yes, you'll pay for them, but in monthly lease payments that were budgeted well ahead of schedule) and, depending on your leasing agreement, they'll probably come with Vista already installed.
So, really, nothing to see here.
Perhaps I should have noted that this was a parody on the parent; a parody on different levels, one being not totally 'keeping it real' just like the parent poster..
And when you gaze long enough into the code, the code will also gaze into you.
I am sure microsoft has much talent with lots of experience working on this project, so if technical merit was the only thing involved, i would expect a nice OS. It is their urge to control every aspect of the user's, forgive the redundancy, use of the system that makes me believe it is going to suck. Things like activation, signed drivers, calling home reporting everything, allowing third parties ( [ri|mp]aa, sony ) to install software without user's knowledge. Agreed this list is all made up, but i have a strong feeling it is going to happen, resulting in a crappy overall experience to what could have been a user friendly OS.
I'll sure give it a try, but for now i think i'll stick to my ubuntu setup.
"Microsoft has kicked off a 'Get Ready' campaign aimed at helping customers prepare for Windows Vista." is analogous to "Inmate lets cellmate lube up before sodomizing him"
Similes are like metaphors
When you order a Pizza delivered, and they say "It'll be there in 40 minutes", and it arrives in 30, the customer is pleased.
When you order a Pizza delivered, and they say "It'll be there in 20 minutes", and it arrives in 30, the customer is pissed.
Setting customer expectations.
RAM that was not a factor of 2 (128/256/512/1024)
You mean a power of 2?
True, but a PIII is more typical a of low-endish machine discarded from the workplace as junk in the last 5 years (a more useful frame of reference in light of the larger discussion than a P90 -- they are not so common anymore). Plus where OpenBSD isn't known to be especially performance oriented (and OpenBSDs various security mods often segfault apps on minor coding errors that squeak by unnoticed on other systems), it can be presumed KDE should run even better on *your OS of choice*.
This is not informative, ignoramuses. It's a joke. You know, "Ha ha, Duke Nukem Forever is vaporware" joke?
Your website is screwed, d00d, and only spits out "If you can see this, it means that the installation of the Apache web server software on this system was successful." Duh!
I'll bet that crossover office will run it just fine. ;-)
-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ *** http://www.mountainfort.com *** +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-
I'm hoping this will run on my Cray-1 with no problems.
Task Mangler
My girlfriend got a new macbook pro, low trim level, 512 mb of ram. My G4 powerbook from Apr 2004 ran circles around it. The swapping made it almost unusable with Safari + Mail + Finder + Adium + that iphoto app. Upgrading to 1 GB improved the responsiveness by orders of magnitude. I'm also in the unique position of having had a motherboard failure in my own powerbook. The lower ram slot stopped being used, necessitating a replacement (under warranty.) That dropped me from 1 GB to 512 MB, and believe me, it did not take long to notice the vast increase in suck. 512 MB is an absolute minimum for having a useful mac. 1 GB seems to be quite adequate. Let's make a fallacious and unfounded assumption and say 768 is the minimum ram req for OS X, 10.4. CS.
Linux HW reqs
Mac 10.4 HW reqs
Solaris 10 HW reqs
In the linux article, the guy got it (don't now distro or version) running on a 33mhz machine, but with no gui.
The mac requires a g3 or up, and 256 MB ram and 3GB HDD space, 4GB with XCode
Solaris requires 120MHz cpu and 256 MB ram (or 512 for PXE), 2GB HDD space
My name is Wootzor von Leetenhaxor
My new laptop says Windows Vista Capable, no coupon.
"But I'm still right here, giving blood and keeping faith. And I'm still right here."
The higher the system requirements appear to be, the more likely a user is to buy a new PC.
Huh!!
Only if he was interested in upgrading to Vista in the first place. I am sure
nobody is going to be inspired to upgrade to Vista only because it's System Reqs are
higher.
Then won't be more likely to upgrade to Vista, if he didn't also upgrade the machine?
If the user buys a new PC Microsoft makes another OEM Vista license sale.
Doesn't MS make more money on a retail sale (i.e. buying it at Bestbuy in a
shrink-wrapped box) than on a OEM License?
I want to buy Windows 2000, but stores no longer stock it. Where can I buy this product, presumably at a substantial discount?
My company provides support for small- to medium-sized businesses, companies that can't afford a full time admin. Most of the workstations we support are running XP Pro, and most are Dell, Compaq, or HP, though there are a few non-name beige boxes, and a number of Win2K systems.
But the median system, if you will, is a 3 year old Compaq Presario, 1.7GHz Celeron, 256MB RAM, 60GB HD, integrated graphics, 100Mbps NIC, running XP Pro. Now, this system may have been "snappy" when it was first booted up, but after dozens of patches and SP2, the OS memory footprint exceeds 200MB immediately after boot, with no applications running. Fire up IE and there's another 32MB committed. If Outlook has WINWORD set as its default editor, say goodbye to another 40-60 MB. And now we're swapping.
The solution we've been implementing is to throw another 256MB stick of RAM into the box, which costs anywhere from $20 to $40, depending on whether it's PC100 or PC2700 or whatever the mobo needs. No more swapping, and the OS loads faster and runs "snappier".
So, tell me about Vista after SP1, SP2, and 59 Windows...err, Microsoft Update critical patches down the road. Is that 1GB going to become 2GB to have a responsive, quick-loading system?
I'm currently building a new system at work to replace my old workstation, which died because of bad caps (damned capacitor cover blew off of the core and embedded itself in the side of the case). Athlon 64 at 2.4GHz, 2GB RAM, 2 x 80GB SATA, integrated graphics for now while I spec out a PCI-Express video card. It's going to be XP Pro for now (and dual boot with FC, I think) but I just know that I'm going to be the office Vista guinea pig, since I have the only PC that can run it.
I'll keep you posted on my results.
k.
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
What, is someone going to be afraid or uncertain about the quality of Vista? What with M$'s stellar reputation for innovation, how could I? Everyone remembers how much worth the money XP was, right? Piffft, more of the same.
I'm not sure why anyone would listen to someone with a troll name like "RzUpAnmsCwrds," but your BS is easy enough to refute.
All of the claims of supposed improvement I made came from M$'s own site.
Windows 2000 & XP have full transparency support, and it's hardware accelerated if your GPU supports the feature (NVIDIA and ATI GPUs do)
Don't confuse nvidia and ati work with M$'s crappy GUI and don't tell me they worked well until very recently. I've seen them then and now. People with those specific cards usually turn those features off because they suck performance. Meanwhile X delivers without cost. Microsoft is pretending this is something new and that they are responsible. It would not be surprising if they are simply touting other people's work as their own again.
Windows 95 had a search item in the Start Menu, years before KDE even existed.
And it called their crappy file finder. The new one is doing what KDE's did, which is to find menu items in the program menu. The funny thing is that M$ needs it much more than KDE does, thanks to the insane vendor name organization forced on Windoze users. The average gnu/linux distro has more programs but organizes the program menu by function, so the menu is easy to browse.
a more integrated browser ... Explorer has supported HTTP since 1997 (IE4's Active Desktop). Windows 98 and later support WebDAV and FTP in the browser. SMB/CIFS has been supported since Windows 95.
Once again, the claim is Microsoft's, and they sorely need it. Don't confuse the Active Desktop abortion with a truly integrated browser. Microsoft has continued to draw a bullshit distinction between local area network files and internet files, which is a continuation of their artificial asymmetric (master and slave) computing model. Windoze users have always had to get third party applications to drag and drop files from ftp and sftp sites because M$ has only cared about NetBIOS. Indeed, M$ has done everything in their power to thwart standards based file transfer and I don't really expect them to live up to the new and improved claims.
Vista is approx. 6.8GB on my system. Office 2003 is ~2-3GB. That's less than 10GB total.
Do you realize how pathetic that is? Open Office, including artwork and fonts, takes up 200MB and I consider that a pig. Mepis, which includes the latest and greatest Open Office, KDE's excellent music player, PIM and contact management system, real databases, web servers etc, takes up less than Office 2003 alone. That's a factor of 10 for Office and a factor three or four for the OS. Your system must take forever to start up and load applications. My computer will load faster than yours, even if your disks work ten times faster than mine and they are not. I'm using nice old 80MB/s scsi drives, for my 1.7 GB of system files, which have transfer rates SATA is finally catching up to.
If what you say is true, Vista is a pig that no CPU or disk subsystem will be able to save. It will need gigs of RAM to use as swap space and even then, it will take all sorts of time to start so it better have excellent uptime. Code so crappy that it sucks up 10 GB of disk space, is going to be anything but stable or secure. This is indeed a Train Wreck.
Some people walk on coals. Others sleep on nails. Still others eat glass. They at least amuse themselves and their friends. Watching people use Vista is going to be a lot like watching people do other silly things.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I mean think about it, these specs are for everyone, your grandma, the neighbor, etc. And given their history on windows at MY house, that means you ARE going to need 1gb of ram in order to run IE with all the spyware and virii and other garbage that unavoidably crops up with uncle jimbo downloads 15 toolbars and visits nothing but sites where my cute naked german roomate is addicted to showering live and online.
Now if they actually made a secure OS that didn't get immediately bogged down with spyware and virii, and maybe dropped IE altogether for Firefox, I can imagine you wouldn't need much more than 256 mb, which some techs I believe have verified the early betas of vista will in fact run on, with some of the eye candy turned off.
It's just tragic that no linux distro really "just works" out of the box with the majority of games and apps that people want. If a distro did (and believe me I'm constantly rooting for and trying out reactos, ubuntu, wine, and others), they would bury these ass-clowns immediately. *sigh* If only I had a couple extra mill to donate to some coders and have them really clean up a distro and make a native version of San Andreas Multiplayer that works out of box, or even an open source alternative that came bundled. That would be a big step forward for FOSS in general, and for humanity over all long term.
rhY
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
..in years and years. They want people to have an overwhelming *first imnpression* about how new and fast and shiny it is. They can't do that if people just buy the disks and run an install on their old machines, they want people to simultaneously upgrade the hardware with their first look at the new OS, which will give them the complete fakeout illusion about how much "better" it is. They also want to keep hardware vendor lockin tied to windows. MS needs the hardware guys to always work on windows drivers and tweaks. If they don't throw a sop to them they will start to get sour on MS and wonder about the symbiotic nature of the "partnership". MS gets to maintain driver primarity with the vendors by always recommending the newest and best, "forcing" hardware upgrades.
This is psychology and advertising/brainwashing.
Are you suggesting that's a bad thing?
The marketing programs and upgrade tool are designed to ease some of the uncertainty around Vista well ahead of the back-to-school and holiday shopping seasons, the two biggest PC selling times of the year. Vista had long been expected to arrive by the 2006 holidays, but Microsoft said in March that it would not arrive on store shelves until January.
First of all, which holiday shopping seasons are they referring to and how many are there to begin with? I thought there was Christmas and maybe Hanukkah and that was about it. And second of all, what the hell does "by the 2006 holidays" mean? That narrows it down to about...365 days since there are holidays all throughout a calendar year. People who phrase things like that are complete idiots.
this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
TO MAKE ME MORE EFFICIENT AT USNIG MY COMPUTER.
Vista you are the key, all 2k monies will be paid to achieve this.
Fail.
Humor is not one of my strong points, sorry.
So.... You're telling me I'll have to finally upgrade my 10MHz 286 1Meg RAM 40Meg HD and 256kb video RAM and Windows 3.1 to run Vista?
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
Amen. I do think Ubuntu is at the forefront of the Regime of Right Answers, but no true prophet has stepped forth yet. And if he did wherefore art thine One Thousand Disciples of the affectionate, altruistic, amicable, benevolent, charitable, compassionate, comprehending, comradely, cordial, disinterested, forgiving, fraternal, generous, humane, intimate, kindly, neighborly, personal, philanthropic, selfless, solicitous, sympathetic, tender, and understanding? Then again, where's the money? Just another strong argument for /etc/history being defined by economical self-interests.
The "perfect" world demands a hive mentality.
Go, dog, go!
I use Linux.
Is that a SCSI connector or are you just glad to see me?
Sorry, but the support from Microsoft argument is not going to ever make sense to me. I've never gotten any reasonable support from that company - ever! My favourite story is the time we tried to report a bug in SQL server to Microsoft and they refused to listen to anything we said until we gave them a credit card number so that they could charge us - we told them that we already had a workaround and hung up on them.
Now you have to decide to "upgrade" to the older version of the OS or this new Vista thing. But wait, Vista has more stringent hardware requirements. Now as a manager do you buy more hardware (which has no appreciable value) or do you upgrade to an OS that may drop support in under 5 years or do you switch OS vendors altogether?
What's wrong with putting your cash into a citrix server?
I waited almost a minute for the website with TFA to load, on a P4 3GHz, 1G RAM with 32KB/s internet connection... Will Vista run on my machine?...
That's why I love Gnome's freecell (Aisleriot): svg(*) cards! :-)).
(*) Scalable Vector Graphics. The size of the cards depends on the size of the window, so they scale with the window/resolution/whatever.
Many companies will not be able to install Vista with all the bells and whistles on their current systems. Home users and early adopters will "beta test" the new features after Vista's release and when Vista hits SP3 the companies will be ready to use all the "tested" and mostly fixed features.
:)
A smart move
On this side of the Atlantic (in the UK), an Aero is a chocolate bar. Does this mean that it is full of holes and will melt under a little heat?
Maybe the specs they provided are to make sure you can boot up everything else. If it becomes too expensive to get Vista, I just might use Knoppix more often, or maybe even try the iPod OS.
If you had Apple, Microsoft, and Linux all on 1 harddisk and you need to remove one of them to make more space, which one would you take out?
no sig = no personality(?)
Improved hardware should enable us to do new and exciting things, not do the same old things in a more bloated and inefficient manner. I've yet to see anything on Vista's features list that falls into the "new and exciting" category, nor that should warrant such a high minimum spec.
"Lewis Carroll" (Charles Lutwidge Dodgson) -- Through the Looking Glass
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Geico has airplane insurance? Where do I sign up?
Did I mention I don't own a plane yet?
wouldn't it be nice if there was an install option that would add all the files your apps/games require but just not use them all the time, IE do we really need Alpha Blending on a desktop? Do we need Active desktop and whizzy things that look nice but serve very little function.
I for one would welcome [our] a streamlined [overlords]OS. [ducks]
In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
OK, I'm a company. If I bought 500 computers from Dell last year, I'd expect to be hoist by my own petard. I'd probably have leased, probably on a three-year term. Given that Microsoft will provide XP support for two years after Vista is released, that fits in nicely with my business plan. I'm confident that the computers I just leased will do their job until they are returned.
I did! A Windows 98SE runs fine at 128MB RAM (can be less not sure) and a clear instal can use less than 250MB. Since I find Native USB Mass Storage for Windows 98 I can use all my USB devices: Flash Drive, iPod, External USB IDE HD adaptor)... True it can't run Google Earth... but It does run Doom3 (patch needed), San Andreas, Far Cry, Rome Total War... and all I need. BTW I Have it on a triple boot system: Ubuntu, 98SE, XP. each one with it's own System partition (Thanks GRUB hide/unhide, no XP messing my 98SE)
Both OS X and WinXp don't run well at all with 256Mb. 512Mb is the minimum I spec out a machine with. OS X sees a big jump in performance at 512Mb and XP, once AV, antispyware et al are loaded, usually sits at 256Mb used, and that's before you open a program. A lot of Mac users (G4 mac minis, most iBooks among the few) are locked out of the spiffy core image graphics (or whatever it's called, I haven't had a coffee yet) that came with Tiger...so I'm not surprised about the steep graphics requirements for the spiffy graphics. And the steep hard drive space req's are just for all the patches and service packs...
Did you get the facts yet? emerge facts should let you install Vista over Linux.
I'm toast :-(
Athlon 64x2 4400+, 4 GB RAM, ATI X1800XT with 512 MB, 80 GB x2 10K disks in a SATA RAID 1 (40 free), Windows XP x64
The little upgrade advisor program aborts, saying it needs to be run on Windows XP.
Apparently, I need to upgrade -- A lot. Damn! I just dropped a pant-load of dollars on this machine.
It said I'd need an additional 15GB of hard drive to install. No surprise.
The only hardware problems reported were the ethernet card and the installed Bluetooth.
I thought there'd be more problems than that!
Did anybody read the footnotes page?
If you want the Aero interface:
* Windows Aero requires:
o DirectX 9 class graphics processor that:
+ Supports a WDDM Driver.
+ Supports Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware.
+ Supports 32 bits per pixel.
o Adequate graphics memory.
+ 64 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor less than 1,310,720 pixels
+ 128 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions from 1,310,720 to 2,304,000 pixels
+ 256 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions higher than 2,304,000 pixels
+ Meets graphics memory bandwidth requirements, as assessed by Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor running on Windows XP
Graphics card memory affects your maximum resolution? I didn't know we went back in time to 1994.
"There's really no reason to wait until the launch of Windows Vista to start shopping for a PC that can deliver a great Windows Vista experience or to start thinking about upgrading your current PC to windows Vista," product manager Greg Amrofell said in a telephone interview.
Bullshit; What you can buy today for $2000 is less than what you will be able to buy tomorrow for the same price. Let alone next year. What he is really saying is there is no reason why vendors shouldnt start marketing Vista.
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
And think about this, with Vista off the table for the Xmas season, the computer companies are going to be crying for sales. This will be especially true as Microsfot ignores them and begins cranking the hype machine.
I'm expecting below cost prices on serious horsepower machines then it's XP for me! (You don't actually expect me to install 1.0 of anything from Microsoft, now do you?
Microsoft caters to IT managers who don't want to think. For people who don't want to think, Microsoft makes it easy. If Microsoft can't do it, "it's not possible", in the words of one of my coworkers. It's a real shame, because there's a lot of very flexible software out there that would make our users' jobs a lot easier, but that might involve some brainpower on the part of the dropouts that run our IT department. I suspect that's the attitude of a lot of Microsoft's customers.
So my Macbook Pro will run Vista, but not my windows desktop. Go figure.
or else!
At least that's what I always thought...
"Premium Ready" is this and this:
Oh yeah, and you paid a freaking Premium for what's going to be XP + 128MB RAM performan ce. 15 GB for the OS, 25 GB for Office, there's no room on this system for Linux now is th ere, chuckles Bill Gates to himself. Meanwhile, Mepis g ives you all the same programs and features for a mere 2GB disk space and 128 MB of RAM, and not a lot of comput er. I've run with a lot less.
Hot Air Graphics are here compared to KDE :
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
"Premium Ready" is this and this:
Oh yeah, and you paid a freaking Premium for what's going to be XP + 128MB RAM performan ce. 15 GB for the OS, 25 GB for Office, there's no room on this system for Linux now is th ere, chuckles Bill Gates to himself. Meanwhile, Mepis g ives you all the same programs and features for a mere 2GB disk space and 128 MB of RAM, and not a lot of comput er. I've run with a lot less.
Hot Air Graphics are here compared to KDE :
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
twitter, why are you posting the same thing again?
twitter, why are you posting the same thing again?
Extracted from Ve3d:
So wtf exactly does Vista do for you as a gamer? Well, we met with Microsoft's Chris Donahue at E3 to learn more about it. The first and most important reason to upgrade would be to get access to Direct X 10. Will you be able to run DX10 now on XP? Nope. It's not backwards compatable with older operating systems. We also chatted a bit with Epic's Mark Rein who said that you would get upwards of a 30% performance increase playing games with Vista since the OS better manages resources. Other cool Vista features include a true 3D desktop, a more streamlined UI (i.e. - user friendly towards non-gamers), and as we learned last week, you can play on Live! against Xbox gamers.
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/709/709432p1.html