Windows Vista Tips

Windows Vista Tips > Newsgroups > Windows Vista General Discussion > Vista Hardware requirement

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

Vista Hardware requirement

 
 
Data miner
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-21-2007
Dear Folks,

My pc specs are as follows,

P4 1.7 Mhz (single core)
Ram 1 gb
Vga 256 mb (ati radion 9600pro)
os : xp professinal and ubuntu 7.10


Now plz, advise me if I should upgrade my OS to Vista (ultimate or
business) or not.

btw, i know the official requirement from the MS. I just want to know
some experience
from you who use vista in a low-end pc.

Thanks in advance.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-21-2007

"Data miner" <> wrote in message
news:b1e54d9a-0e20-4f3e-af0a-...
> Dear Folks,
>
> My pc specs are as follows,
>
> P4 1.7 Mhz (single core)
> Ram 1 gb
> Vga 256 mb (ati radion 9600pro)
> os : xp professinal and ubuntu 7.10
>
>
> Now plz, advise me if I should upgrade my OS to Vista (ultimate or
> business) or not.
>
> btw, i know the official requirement from the MS. I just want to know
> some experience
> from you who use vista in a low-end pc.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>



I installed Vista on an XP-2800 cpu machine with 1.5 gigs of RAM and a
somewhat similar video card.

It runs Win2k, XP and PClinuxOS just great.

However I was quite disappointed with Vista's performance.

I'd honestly NOT go with Vista. Though I did not found it to be
horrible...there was nothing I could see about it that was an improvement
over XP...
so I got rid of it.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Data miner
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-21-2007
quote:

'However I was quite disappointed with Vista's performance.'

you mean the os is unstable or its slow on your pc ?


On Nov 21, 11:05 pm, "philo" <ph...@privacy.net> wrote:
> "Data miner" <haseeb.mah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b1e54d9a-0e20-4f3e-af0a-...
>
>
>
> > Dear Folks,

>
> > My pc specs are as follows,

>
> > P4 1.7 Mhz (single core)
> > Ram 1 gb
> > Vga 256 mb (ati radion 9600pro)
> > os : xp professinal and ubuntu 7.10

>
> > Now plz, advise me if I should upgrade my OS to Vista (ultimate or
> > business) or not.

>
> > btw, i know the official requirement from the MS. I just want to know
> > some experience
> > from you who use vista in a low-end pc.

>
> > Thanks in advance.

>
> I installed Vista on an XP-2800 cpu machine with 1.5 gigs of RAM and a
> somewhat similar video card.
>
> It runs Win2k, XP and PClinuxOS just great.
>
> However I was quite disappointed with Vista's performance.
>
> I'd honestly NOT go with Vista. Though I did not found it to be
> horrible...there was nothing I could see about it that was an improvement
> over XP...
> so I got rid of it.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-21-2007
It can run Vista for sure, but I would recommend maxing out the RAM if
possible. if you can upgrade the video card too, go for it. But, you can't
be 100 % sure, so what I would do is run the Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor
to guarantee that everything is in order.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...deadvisor.mspx
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
"Data miner" <> wrote in message
news:b1e54d9a-0e20-4f3e-af0a-...
> Dear Folks,
>
> My pc specs are as follows,
>
> P4 1.7 Mhz (single core)
> Ram 1 gb
> Vga 256 mb (ati radion 9600pro)
> os : xp professinal and ubuntu 7.10
>
>
> Now plz, advise me if I should upgrade my OS to Vista (ultimate or
> business) or not.
>
> btw, i know the official requirement from the MS. I just want to know
> some experience
> from you who use vista in a low-end pc.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Data miner
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-21-2007
thanks for the reply. however graphics card is ok imo.
only problem i would guess is running flash based stuffs.
it takes a huge part from the cpu while running.



On Nov 22, 12:12 am, "Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]"
<andre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> It can run Vista for sure, but I would recommend maxing out the RAM if
> possible. if you can upgrade the video card too, go for it. But, you can't
> be 100 % sure, so what I would do is run the Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor
> to guarantee that everything is in order.
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...buyorupgrade/u...
> --
> Andre
> Blog:http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
> My Vista Quickstart Guide:http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!E8E5CC039D51E3DB!9709.entry"Data miner" <haseeb.mah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b1e54d9a-0e20-4f3e-af0a-...
>
> > Dear Folks,

>
> > My pc specs are as follows,

>
> > P4 1.7 Mhz (single core)
> > Ram 1 gb
> > Vga 256 mb (ati radion 9600pro)
> > os : xp professinal and ubuntu 7.10

>
> > Now plz, advise me if I should upgrade my OS to Vista (ultimate or
> > business) or not.

>
> > btw, i know the official requirement from the MS. I just want to know
> > some experience
> > from you who use vista in a low-end pc.

>
> > Thanks in advance.


 
Reply With Quote
 
HeyBub
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-21-2007
philo wrote:
>>

>
>
> I installed Vista on an XP-2800 cpu machine with 1.5 gigs of RAM and a
> somewhat similar video card.
>
> It runs Win2k, XP and PClinuxOS just great.
>
> However I was quite disappointed with Vista's performance.
>
> I'd honestly NOT go with Vista. Though I did not found it to be
> horrible...there was nothing I could see about it that was an
> improvement over XP...
> so I got rid of it.


Most of the new stuff in Vista is not visible anyway - it's under the hood,
so to speak.


 
Reply With Quote
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-21-2007

"Data miner" <> wrote in message
news:5cda160b-61e3-478b-9bbf-...
> quote:
>
> 'However I was quite disappointed with Vista's performance.'
>
> you mean the os is unstable or its slow on your pc ?
>



<snip>

Vista was certainly as stable as XP...
it just ran slower.

I'm sure...with some pretty new H/W Vista would run fine...but with "modest"
H/W I'd say
Win2k or XP would be a better choice


 
Reply With Quote
 
James David Byrne
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-23-2007
In my experience, given the same hardware spec, Vista will be noticably
slower than XP. With 1gb I found it impossibly so. Suggest 2gb min. Would
personally recommend you stay with XP. I've had so many niggles with Vista
and found such frustration trying to use the mess that once perfectly good
facilities have now become -if they are still there at all- that I can't in
all honesty recommend it other than to those who are teckkies!

"Data miner" <> wrote in message
news:b1e54d9a-0e20-4f3e-af0a-...
> Dear Folks,
>
> My pc specs are as follows,
>
> P4 1.7 Mhz (single core)
> Ram 1 gb
> Vga 256 mb (ati radion 9600pro)
> os : xp professinal and ubuntu 7.10
>
>
> Now plz, advise me if I should upgrade my OS to Vista (ultimate or
> business) or not.
>
> btw, i know the official requirement from the MS. I just want to know
> some experience
> from you who use vista in a low-end pc.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vista Upgrade Requirement bearatone12 Windows Vista Installation 5 05-02-2008 04:53 PM
Memory requirement for Vista dave bond Windows Vista Hardware 7 04-09-2008 09:07 PM
XP / Vista independent boot requirement John Windows Vista General Discussion 3 08-28-2007 10:34 PM
New MDP test requirement for Vista system 1538341 Windows Vista General Discussion 0 10-19-2006 12:32 AM
more requirement q's.. sry dale Windows Vista General Discussion 0 06-11-2006 05:01 AM



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59