Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by XPD, Sep 8, 2005.

  1. XPD

    XPD Guest

    From GGMania.com

    " Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista - Hardware vendors are going
    to love the news that Windows Vista is going to need very beefy hardware to
    run well. Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC
    that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of
    DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive "

    HAH! If that happens then I can see a LOT of people going "^&$# you MS, were
    off to Apple/Linux"
     
    XPD, Sep 8, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. XPD wrote:
    > " Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista - Hardware vendors are going
    > to love the news that Windows Vista is going to need very beefy hardware to
    > run well. Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC
    > that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of
    > DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive "
    >
    > HAH! If that happens then I can see a LOT of people going "^&$# you MS, were
    > off to Apple/Linux"


    whens it meant to launch?
    Those specs might be ok for the time.

    the work PCs here(doing standard office work have 512MB standard, and
    1024 in some of them(becoming more popular).

    --
    http://dave.net.nz <- My personal site.
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Sep 8, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. XPD

    H.O.G Guest

    On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 07:50:15 +1200, "XPD" <>
    spoke these fine words:

    >
    >From GGMania.com
    >
    >" Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista - Hardware vendors are going
    >to love the news that Windows Vista is going to need very beefy hardware to
    >run well. Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC
    >that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of
    >DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive "
    >
    >HAH! If that happens then I can see a LOT of people going "^&$# you MS, were
    >off to Apple/Linux"
    >

    Firstly, that's really not hefty. Sure, compared with some crappy
    machine from a couple of years ago it is, but not for new hardware
    next year.

    It's always the same. People say "Oh my god!!" before a next
    generation game or OS comes out, but it really isn't a big deal.

    The other important feature about Vista is that you *can* run it
    happily with much lower specs, and all that happens is much of the eye
    candy is automatically disabled.

    I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.
     
    H.O.G, Sep 9, 2005
    #3
  4. XPD

    cyril Guest

    But what more will it REALLY do that any different to my current setup,
    of is it just more trinkets and other poorly written fat laden code.

    Cyril
     
    cyril, Sep 9, 2005
    #4
  5. XPD

    Mutlley Guest

    H.O.G <> wrote:

    >On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 07:50:15 +1200, "XPD" <>
    >spoke these fine words:
    >
    >>
    >>From GGMania.com
    >>
    >>" Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista - Hardware vendors are going
    >>to love the news that Windows Vista is going to need very beefy hardware to
    >>run well. Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC
    >>that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of
    >>DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive "
    >>
    >>HAH! If that happens then I can see a LOT of people going "^&$# you MS, were
    >>off to Apple/Linux"
    >>

    >Firstly, that's really not hefty. Sure, compared with some crappy
    >machine from a couple of years ago it is, but not for new hardware
    >next year.
    >
    >It's always the same. People say "Oh my god!!" before a next
    >generation game or OS comes out, but it really isn't a big deal.
    >
    >The other important feature about Vista is that you *can* run it
    >happily with much lower specs, and all that happens is much of the eye
    >candy is automatically disabled.
    >
    >I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.


    Care to give us the specs for the "basic" boxes. One mans basic is
    another mans grunt machine..
     
    Mutlley, Sep 9, 2005
    #5
  6. XPD

    Steve H Guest

    On 8 Sep 2005 16:52:24 -0700, cyril wrote:

    > But what more will it REALLY do that any different to my current setup,
    > of is it just more trinkets and other poorly written fat laden code.


    ohh so you have seen the code behind vista - have your eyes fallen out yet
    ?

    -----------------
    Steven H
     
    Steve H, Sep 9, 2005
    #6
  7. Mutlley wrote:
    >>I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.


    > Care to give us the specs for the "basic" boxes. One mans basic is
    > another mans grunt machine..


    I had it installed on a P3 550 with 512MB ram, and I think it was an
    Nvidia Ti4200 128MB video.

    --
    http://dave.net.nz <- My personal site.
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Sep 9, 2005
    #7
  8. XPD

    cyril Guest

    no not at all, but something has to use all that memory and resource,
    but there seems little real end benefits.

    Cyril
     
    cyril, Sep 9, 2005
    #8
  9. cyril wrote:
    > no not at all, but something has to use all that memory and resource,
    > but there seems little real end benefits.


    software support seems to be about it... by that, I mean software that
    is made to run on the OS, not the OS itself.

    --
    http://dave.net.nz <- My personal site.
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Sep 9, 2005
    #9
  10. XPD

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > Mutlley wrote:
    >
    >>> I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.

    >
    >
    >> Care to give us the specs for the "basic" boxes. One mans basic is
    >> another mans grunt machine..

    >
    >
    > I had it installed on a P3 550 with 512MB ram, and I think it was an
    > Nvidia Ti4200 128MB video.
    >

    Yep, just what I thought - that'd be one of my grunt machines :-(
     
    -=rjh=-, Sep 9, 2005
    #10
  11. XPD

    H.O.G Guest

    On 8 Sep 2005 16:52:24 -0700, "cyril" <> spoke
    these fine words:

    >But what more will it REALLY do that any different to my current setup,
    >of is it just more trinkets and other poorly written fat laden code.
    >

    Pretty much.

    There is some additional "under the bonnet" stuff which will cause
    future applications to not necessarily be backwards compatible to
    previous Windows versions.

    In the large part I found it a little disappointing. Granted, it is
    nice, and is a nice "next version" for XP, but I would only ever buy
    it OEM instead of XP. I wouldn't waste money on an upgrade.

    Having said that, it will be MS's first stable desktop OS with proper
    64-bit support, so that is a reasonably major thing. And I have only
    played with the BETA - the final version might be better.
     
    H.O.G, Sep 9, 2005
    #11
  12. -=rjh=- wrote:
    >>>> I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.


    >>> Care to give us the specs for the "basic" boxes. One mans basic is
    >>> another mans grunt machine..


    >> I had it installed on a P3 550 with 512MB ram, and I think it was an
    >> Nvidia Ti4200 128MB video.


    > Yep, just what I thought - that'd be one of my grunt machines :-(


    wow, someones grunt machine is over three(closer to 5 from memory?)
    years old, never thought I'd see it.

    either way, I'd imagine that a P3 550 would be below the average users
    PC surely... the ram might not be, but buying SDram is like buying junk
    food, it's cheap as chips to through 512MB(2x256, or ever 128x4) at a
    machine

    --
    http://dave.net.nz <- My personal site.
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Sep 9, 2005
    #12
  13. XPD

    MarkH Guest

    -=rjh=- <> wrote in news::

    > Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    >> Mutlley wrote:
    >>
    >>>> I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.

    >>
    >>
    >>> Care to give us the specs for the "basic" boxes. One mans basic is
    >>> another mans grunt machine..

    >>
    >>
    >> I had it installed on a P3 550 with 512MB ram, and I think it was an
    >> Nvidia Ti4200 128MB video.
    >>

    > Yep, just what I thought - that'd be one of my grunt machines :-(


    Grunt machine? Hell, if I upgraded the video card in my No5 PC (Test PC
    No2) then it would match that exactly. But to give it a Ti4200 I would
    have to upgrade the video card in either No2 PC (Writer) or No3 PC
    (Server) to have the spare card, I would never buy a new card for my old
    test box.

    If MS is recommending the ideal hardware in a new PC then 2GB RAM
    shouldn’t be a problem as RAM is not that dear today and DDR3 1GB RAM
    modules could easily be quite affordable by the time that Vista is
    released. Clearly they are suggesting the use of a good video card
    rather than onboard video, the standard gaming card at the time of the
    release of Vista should meet the recommendation. SATA 2 HDDs will be
    standard by then.

    For users with a 3 year old PC it could be better to stick with the
    existing OS until they buy a new machine, for new PCs the recommended
    hardware will cost under $2000 incl with Vista, the minimum hardware
    will be available for under $1K incl with Vista.

    Linux will still be a valid option on new and old hardware.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 5-September-05)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
     
    MarkH, Sep 9, 2005
    #13
  14. XPD

    H.O.G Guest

    On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 13:07:16 +1200, Mutlley <>
    spoke these fine words:

    >H.O.G <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 07:50:15 +1200, "XPD" <>
    >>spoke these fine words:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>From GGMania.com
    >>>
    >>>" Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista - Hardware vendors are going
    >>>to love the news that Windows Vista is going to need very beefy hardware to
    >>>run well. Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC
    >>>that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of
    >>>DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive "
    >>>
    >>>HAH! If that happens then I can see a LOT of people going "^&$# you MS, were
    >>>off to Apple/Linux"
    >>>

    >>Firstly, that's really not hefty. Sure, compared with some crappy
    >>machine from a couple of years ago it is, but not for new hardware
    >>next year.
    >>
    >>It's always the same. People say "Oh my god!!" before a next
    >>generation game or OS comes out, but it really isn't a big deal.
    >>
    >>The other important feature about Vista is that you *can* run it
    >>happily with much lower specs, and all that happens is much of the eye
    >>candy is automatically disabled.
    >>
    >>I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.

    >
    >Care to give us the specs for the "basic" boxes. One mans basic is
    >another mans grunt machine..


    Most basic was a AthlonXP 2000+ (I think), with a Radeon 9250 (might
    have been a 9600Pro).

    Also a Centrino 1.5 notebook with a 9700Pro, and an A64 2800+ with
    something light in the graphics dept.

    Also put it through one of our grunt machines - an Athlon64 4000+
    (might have been a 3800+, can't remember) with 4GB RAM and 6800GT
    256MB. Haven't tried it on our dual Opteron test machine yet.

    Interestingly, other than a couple of installation issues (it is BETA
    afterall), it ran very stably on pretty much everything, and driver
    support was pretty awesome. Other than a couple of minor things
    (mainly modems), almost all drivers loaded out-of-the-box.
     
    H.O.G, Sep 9, 2005
    #14
  15. XPD

    GraB Guest

    On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:36:05 +1200, H.O.G <> wrote:

    >On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 07:50:15 +1200, "XPD" <>
    >spoke these fine words:
    >
    >>
    >>From GGMania.com
    >>
    >>" Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista - Hardware vendors are going
    >>to love the news that Windows Vista is going to need very beefy hardware to
    >>run well. Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC
    >>that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of
    >>DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive "
    >>
    >>HAH! If that happens then I can see a LOT of people going "^&$# you MS, were
    >>off to Apple/Linux"
    >>

    >Firstly, that's really not hefty. Sure, compared with some crappy
    >machine from a couple of years ago it is, but not for new hardware
    >next year.
    >
    >It's always the same. People say "Oh my god!!" before a next
    >generation game or OS comes out, but it really isn't a big deal.
    >
    >The other important feature about Vista is that you *can* run it
    >happily with much lower specs, and all that happens is much of the eye
    >candy is automatically disabled.
    >
    >I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.


    But without much of the new stuff, including the new file system.
     
    GraB, Sep 9, 2005
    #15
  16. XPD

    Mutlley Guest

    "Dave - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote:

    >Mutlley wrote:
    >>>I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.

    >
    >> Care to give us the specs for the "basic" boxes. One mans basic is
    >> another mans grunt machine..

    >
    >I had it installed on a P3 550 with 512MB ram, and I think it was an
    >Nvidia Ti4200 128MB video.


    Yep. That's a good basic box..
     
    Mutlley, Sep 9, 2005
    #16
  17. XPD

    -=rjh=- Guest

    XPD wrote:
    > From GGMania.com
    >
    > " Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista - Hardware vendors are going
    > to love the news that Windows Vista is going to need very beefy hardware to
    > run well. Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC
    > that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of
    > DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive "
    >
    > HAH! If that happens then I can see a LOT of people going "^&$# you MS, were
    > off to Apple/Linux"
    >
    >


    Oh, crap.

    People will just buy an upgraded machine sooner or later; the new
    machine will come with Vista preinstalled. In a couple of years when
    Vista launches, those specs won't seem high at all.

    Besides, won't Vista offer some amazing new features that will be worth
    upgrading for? Like transparent menus and stuff?
     
    -=rjh=-, Sep 9, 2005
    #17
  18. XPD

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > -=rjh=- wrote:
    >
    >>>>> I've had the BETA running on some pretty basic boxes.

    >
    >
    >>>> Care to give us the specs for the "basic" boxes. One mans basic is
    >>>> another mans grunt machine..

    >
    >
    >>> I had it installed on a P3 550 with 512MB ram, and I think it was an
    >>> Nvidia Ti4200 128MB video.

    >
    >
    >> Yep, just what I thought - that'd be one of my grunt machines :-(

    >
    >
    > wow, someones grunt machine is over three(closer to 5 from memory?)
    > years old, never thought I'd see it.


    Actually, I did exaggerate a little; my video is only 64MB ATI, and PCI
    at that. And I only have 384MB of ram. It has a 600MHz cpu, though :)

    But I use it for a surprising amount of stuff, including video
    transcoding and image editing - and it runs 2 monitors fine. I've looked
    at upgrading, but frankly, I just can't be bothered - too much else to
    spend time and money on.

    I know people who do even more with less, and others who do less with more.

    Meanwhile I'm hanging out for a Nokia 770.
     
    -=rjh=-, Sep 9, 2005
    #18
  19. XPD

    Craig Sutton Guest

    "XPD" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > From GGMania.com
    >
    > " Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista - Hardware vendors are

    going
    > to love the news that Windows Vista is going to need very beefy hardware

    to
    > run well. Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC
    > that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB

    of
    > DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive "
    >
    > HAH! If that happens then I can see a LOT of people going "^&$# you MS,

    were
    > off to Apple/Linux"
    >
    >

    Why? by the time it comes out that sort of system will be standard
     
    Craig Sutton, Sep 9, 2005
    #19
  20. XPD

    Tim Guest

    > There is some additional "under the bonnet" stuff which will cause
    > future applications to not necessarily be backwards compatible to
    > previous Windows versions.


    Whats the point in bring out a new OS unless it has new integrated features?
    If you code s/w to use the new features then DUH of course it will not be
    backwards compatible - unless the programmer is are careful in how they hook
    in the new features.

    "Vista" has a considerable amount of new stuff "under the bonnet". Very very
    considerable.
    Personally much of the new GUI stuff bores me - just as the OS X stuff seems
    absurd. It will be a long time before a GUI will impress me as I already
    have substantial expectations of what a mature GUI should be able to do and
    as yet the hardware capabilities do not exist (IE DPI ratings of displays
    are way too low, 3D is still over the horizon, animation is grossly
    immature, perspective does not exist - there is only 1 'static' user visual
    perspective, etc.).

    The big point is however not that the OS GUI uses these new features (which
    if you don't like you don't have to see and can turn off), it is the fact
    these features are also integrated into the OS and its libraries and
    integrated with h/w (if you have it) so makes these many new features
    available to programmers to do swish things with.

    OTOH, it is reasonable for the GUI vendor (Apple or MS or who ever) to
    implement some of these new features in the GUI to show them off as this
    does sell to many people (and to the rest, just turn it off).

    > In the large part I found it a little disappointing. Granted, it is
    > nice, and is a nice "next version" for XP, but I would only ever buy
    > it OEM instead of XP. I wouldn't waste money on an upgrade.


    > Having said that, it will be MS's first stable desktop OS with proper
    > 64-bit support, so that is a reasonably major thing. And I have only
    > played with the BETA - the final version might be better.


    Um, have you not heard of Windows XP 64 bit? It is - shock horror - a 64 bit
    OS, it is stable, it is proper (unlike OS X) - the only issue with it is not
    so much with the OS but with h/w device manufacturers being slow to produce
    drivers. But then it is a new OS...

    As for h/w specs. MS has historically always given excellent support for old
    h.w (unlike Apple). 3GHz with 2GB RAM bla bla bla is pretty average for a
    *recommended* spec system. I always find it incredible that some people will
    moan about recommended new system specs when the OS will run happily on
    considerably lesser h/w. Take W2K3 Server - runs beaut on a P2 400.

    2 cents.
     
    Tim, Sep 9, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Russell Lusignan

    Unity 4.0 Hardware Requirements

    Russell Lusignan, Oct 14, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    773
    Russell Lusignan
    Oct 20, 2003
  2. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    725
    Digna_MA
    Oct 30, 2007
  3. pixel

    Windows OEM hardware requirements

    pixel, Aug 5, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    1,199
    Brett Roberts
    Aug 7, 2004
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Hefty licensing requirements for Dimdows Vista

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 2, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    349
    Waylon Kenning
    Oct 3, 2005
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,011
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page