that means nothing. under XP, i can have page filing disabled, photoshop CS, winamp, IE, Firefox, opera and BF2 open siultaneously without slowdown. You can't do that in vista with a mere 2GB RAM. vista essentially adds 512-1024GB worth of additional memory useage. The average user only has 1024mb RAM to begin with and new games like crysis and UT04 might take 2GB RAM all to themselves. and then there is the issue of drivers being absolute ----. as it is, vista just isn't worth it. http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-...ista/page2.html http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2096940,00.asp I'm not paying money for a performance hit.
Vista doesnt take 512mb to 1024mb...I run it and with nothing open takes 310mb...Thats not much really if you think about it..Vista is a big leep and it wont be long until we have 4gb standard anyway Arbiter
In order to install the upgrade, you have to have a current version of windows installed, or have a full installation disc for an older version of windows, otherwise you cant install it, and its still limited to 1 PC, or atleast it should be.
that's because of a few things A you haven't used it enough for it to start caching based on your typical useage B you don't have much RAM and a lot is going to page file and on Xtreme Systems, they had a thread and everyone with 2gb ended up w/ around 800mb in use without anything open as well. 200mb or so is the allowed footprint for systems w/ 512MB RAM. If so, i seriously suggest you leave the internet NOW before making suggestions because w/ 512mb i doubt you're doing much more than using a webbrowser and a word processor. Just use Beryl or something if you need eyecandy
I have been using vista for other a month...and i have 1.5gb of ram..Vista runs nearly the same as XP just a little difference when playing FEAR...I got a rubbish gfx card though. *edit* Im not coming to any consumptions here but you really cant judge vista until you have tryied it..I was saying bad things about it but then i thought i would try it..Now i use it mostly as a Primary OS..I have Xp on another hard drive and using XP now as im waiting for my sound card drivers to come out...As soon as they do i'll format my XP drive to just have vista Arbiter
it's almost surely the drivers. drivers for vista are crapa t this moment especially nVidia drivers. IMO ATI's always had the better hardware and vista the better drivers. That's why the migration to vista's so hard for nVidia, they have to start form scratch on the driver side.
I havent had any problems with vista nvidia drivers..Not that id would know if i did...but my card runs the same as it does in Xp..Except slight performace drop when playing graphical games like FEAR and NFS Carbon...Nothing much..5-10 FPS difference Arbiter
that's the driver issues I was referring to. the GFX ard isn't being properly utilized by the OS as the drivers aren't polished enough. try newer drivers though, as thigns are improving. again, that's why i recommended waiting 6 months before "upgrading"
You cant blame vista for unsupported drivers and software. Just like when people complained about XP it makes me mad they do. If we allow 100% backwards compatibility, the OS itself would be around 100GB, and slower. New OS, means Compatibility Issues. New XBox, means compatibility issues, new anything will cause some compatibility issues. You cant blame it on vista. Those who want it need to make sure enough stuff works on it. Dont buy it without looking at software compatibility or drivers first. Every one of my hardware components has a vista driver, and its weird to hear people say how nothing is availble yet. My comp is 2 years old too, so thats some old hardware thats already got drivers. That 5-10FPS hit might be because of DX10 and the removal of the API. DX9 stuff will have to be converted with a emulator.
