Windows 7 requirements
 

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/w...m-requirements

wow. Microsoft doesn't know how to fix things. It requires double the memory from vista ( 2gb for 64-bit) and 20 gb of hard drive space.

Wow. I'll not be getting a PC with that horrible suck up of memory. Next computer will definitely be a mac.

Shit.

Hmm my computer will have 8GB of ram so it won't be a problem for me at all Im gonna wait to see what other people think of it after its official release.

They haven't finished fixing Vista yet, and they've already released another operating system?

I'm sure every new computer buyer will be THRILLED to have it... :sigh:

First off: Vista failed, Microsoft knows it, Windows 7 is their answer.

Second: If you have a 32 bit processor and you don't have a gig of ram yet you have really fallen behind. I don't see how it is such a big problem.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...e&Order=PRICED

The most expensive 1gb ram. $24. Is it really that big of deal?

RAM is surprisingly cheap now compared to what it was awhile ago. I can get 10GB of RAM put into my computer for 150 AUD which is like 130 USD

It's the 20GB of hard disk space that's really excessive.But I heard Windows 7 was a nice and powerful OS.

Again I point to newegg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...ame=7200%20RPM

Prices of hard drives are also relatively cheap. I could name 3 games that I have that take up just as much space!

Its great that all the parts are cheap (RAM and hard drives) but its just the principle. The OS should be small enough where you shouldn't notice it running. 2gb of RAM and 20gb of hard drive space is outrageous when compared to Linix or OSX. Advancement in technology should be making things faster and using less RAM and space so you can use it for other things, not constantly increasing the requirements with each new OS.

I probably won't get it, though Vista is the Antichrist... Yep, guess I'll get a Mac. Eh, Macs are already more geared towards what I would need them for anyway. Unfortunately they have less pirated software available...

Those specs are when it's fully loaded though.

I thought they dumped Vista...

I like my Windows... their marketing strategy annoys me... they stopped releasing the XP OS (where they took years to finally clear most bugs) and force everyone with new computers to use the half finished Vista... then now they dump that and go "oh oops sorry I just sold you some glamorous rubbish, here's another piece if crap you should buy"

But with that said I wouldn't go Mac xD I'll just find a copy of XP in the black market or something...

Personally I love vista over XP. I've only had one game which couldn't run(KOTOR) and thats not a big deal. Vista has really worked out a lot of its bugs lately and if you have a computer that can handle it, it's very nice.

I like vista too. The only problem I ever hated about it was the com surrogate error I kept getting, but I've fixed that already.

Vista is very resource sucking... I use vista at work and it often does some massive lag and I'm not even playing games on this! I just had maybe a few extra excel sheet opened... or a few tabs in Firefox..

I've had good experiences with my Vista too. For the most part.

Occasionally, it will freeze on me or act stupid. For instance, my start menu (Windows Explorer?) will freeze on me when I try to change the volume. Or other problems specific to applications.

Vista looks fine but I care more about what its like underneath, and it happens to be a resource hog. Windows 7 is double the hog of vista....so I definitely won't be getting it.

Mac with duel boot windows XP will be my next machine

Have you actually tried Windows 7? It actually is a much smoother ride than vista. It's much more streamlined and is NOT a resource hog.

Vista's minimum requirement is 1gb of ram....Windows 7 is 2 gb of ram. How is that not a resource hog? Frankly I'd rather be able to use the memory for something else other than just turning my computer on.

Maybe.. they realised 1gb isnt really enough.. so they recommend 2 gig for better performance...?

Most computers nowadays come with 2 gig ram by default anyway...

wats the difference betwen 32bit and 64bit? (In very simple terms please..)

64 bit is supposed to be faster because it is able to use more of a system's........ stuff.

I think right now, most stuff is transitioning to 64 bit but sometimes 32 bit applications have problems running on 64 bit computers...


(That's basically all I understand about 32 bit/64 bit and all I need to know.. xD)

Macs are all icing with no cake. Their performance is good, yes, and they look nice, but you pay quite a bit more for the same performance level. You also can't stuff an i7 processor into that tiny Mac.

Not to mention PC has much more software compatibility.

I guess Mac OS must really be that bad if you need to dual OS the chief competitor's product onto your computer as well.

Just because requirements went up doesn't mean it's more of a resource hog. Go dual boot Win7 and Vista to see =).

32bit and 64bit refers to the amount of RAM the computer can address.

The limit of RAM on 32bit machines is 4gb. The rest is ignored. The reason why is simple:

On the computer an address has a structure like this 00000000. This number points to a section of the RAM. Now 32bits is 4 bytes. Each byte is 2 digits. Hence the 8 digits. Now since the computers use HEX(base 16) each digit can be an F which is equal to our base 10 number 16.

Now FFFFFFFF is equal to 4294967295 bytes. Which just so happens to be 4gb.

64bit systems can reference 8 bytes or 18446744073709551615 bytes. Which makes the new limit on RAM really really big.


Basically, computers with less than 4gb ram are 32 bit, more than 4gb ram 64bit.

And yes, the Core i7 is awsome.

I like Mac OS, and when I did have one, I didn't duel boot XP on it, I just used the Mac OS. The only reason I'm duel booting windows if/when I get my mac is to play fiesta (since its not compatible). Other than that, I'll be using the mac OS.

When comparing performance level, do you mean just hardware? 2gb of ram will preform much better in a Mac then in a PC. If you make two computers with identical hardware and one is mac and one is a PC, the mac will have better performance. Mac hardware is more expensive, yes, but it would preform better because the Mac OS uses half the resources of a windows OS.

Though you are correct about compatibility and higher end processors, but I'm fine with that.

I acknowledge that Macs make better use of the hardware provided to them. The hardware performance on a Mac will always exceed that of a PC. Macs are more of a style accessory, and is better for lower-end applications.

I do, however, like Mac touchpads and style chassis. I'm shopping for a laptop myself, so I've been doing some homework on this.

OOOo thanks T6!

....I'm a PC

I can't bring myself to like Macs, no matter how I try. ~.~