The new windows XP

XP was released when new computers would have been high end Pentium 3's or early sub 2.0ghz P4's. The original version of XP with the software at the time ran quite well on these platforms, and you can still nicely run XP on a Pentium 3
 
XP was released when new computers would have been high end Pentium 3's or early sub 2.0ghz P4's. The original version of XP with the software at the time ran quite well on these platforms, and you can still nicely run XP on a Pentium 3

hmmm im not so sure on that ?

maybe a mid P4 will run it well, you can run XP on a P3 but im i would prob be screaming at the loading times after having anti virus, anti spyware some background programs like live messenger, maybe a torrent host, i dont think i could be happy with a P3 running XP at all
 
Try running Vista on the Pentium 3...

Thats my point.

It is not the way forward to make OS's more and more complex I don't think. A faster machine should be used to run whatever you want to use it for. It shouldn't be used up by the GUI and whatever else is going on underneath.
 
my PC has 512 RAM, and that runs vista basic perfectly fine.. and has done for over a year

my laptop has 2GB ram and runs vista premium fine

i play age of empires III and halo on both, no problems

all this about vista needing huge amounts of RAM is pure bull*......... how comes i can do it if its so bad???
 
Try running Vista on the Pentium 3...

Thats my point.

It is not the way forward to make OS's more and more complex I don't think. A faster machine should be used to run whatever you want to use it for. It shouldn't be used up by the GUI and whatever else is going on underneath.

Try running XP on a P1, it's the same thing. Same comparison.

Now that i've said my peace, can we drop the XP vs. Vista in this thread? We are way off topic.
 
Ah okay, fair enough.

I guess its not fair I haven't tested it myself, but, I've heard from other friends, other forums/reports that it does have an effect.

It's slightly off topic, but Vista is the new Operating System from Microsoft that has been publically named. I have no idea what Windows 7 would be like when compared with both XP and Vista in the same environment.
 
I think something that must be said here for anyone crying about needing more ram. Have you looked at the prices lately you can get a cheap set of 2X1 ddr2 800mhz memory for under $40 bucks these days. I could understand it being a problem if it was like it was when I bought my first 2X1 combo for over $220 which now retail for like $45 bucks.

I still have the computer I bought shortly after XP had come out and here are its spec's.

1.9Ghz P4 not sure of the cache levels
256MB of 800 Mhz RD Ram
80GB HD
64 Ge Force MX400 GPU
Soundblaster card forget the model

And that setup there was almost 2K back when I got it from gateway sometime in later 01.

Its natural that operating systems will get more and more complex. What is it you can't run on Vista that runs so much better on XP??? Look at the average system then vs the average system now.

Average wise todays average is more than adequate for Vista.

The next windows is only going to get more demanding and you'd be foolish to think otherwise. By the time its released 8GB of memory will be standard along with quad core's and 1 terabyte plus hard drives. I bet thats the next selling point since everything is going HD. People will need storage space so thats going to play a big rule in selling computers in the next few years.
 
Yeah, I'm sorry for bringing it up. I guess I just don't understand some of the goings on inside an OS that needs to be made to use more resources in the next build.

Any idea if Microsoft will ever build an Operating System from the ground up? :p
 
Ah-ha, thats what I must have heard about.

Surely that will infact speed things up, as the code can be built for newer hardware than maybe some of the older code has been in the past?
 
Back
Top Bottom