Building a new computer

[Ace Rimmer]

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

I believe it does.

Yeah I just looked it up. Had I shelled out another $20 I would have gotten free blu-ray player software with the retail package. So much for going cheap with the OEM version!

 

[Tokyo Slim]

Originally Posted by Ace Rimmer

Yeah I just looked it up. Had I shelled out another $20 I would have gotten free blu-ray player software with the retail package. So much for going cheap with the OEM version!

Can you return it ?

 

[hws]

Originally Posted by Ace Rimmer

Speaking of pathetic, I have a copy of Windows Me.

Hey, it came with my Dell ....
Windows ME was ****! I like Mandriva Linux, with OpenOffice and other thing. I have one with Windows 7 Professional 64, is ok, with 4GB RAM, no so ok with less of 4GB.

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by hws

Windows ME was ****!
I like Mandriva Linux, with OpenOffice and other thing.
I have one with Windows 7 Professional 64, is ok, with 4GB RAM, no so ok with less of 4GB.

I don't understand why ever since Vista came out, Windows needs THAT much RAM just to run!

 

[hws]

Originally Posted by imageWIS

I don't understand why ever since Vista came out, Windows needs THAT much RAM just to run!
Same for me

 

[lakewolf]

1. Windows is doing more **** at the same time than before
2. RAM is cheap nowadays

 

[hws]

Originally Posted by lakewolf

1. Windows is doing more **** at the same time than before 2. RAM is cheap nowadays
This is true, I think question of ImageWIS was rhetorical question?

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by hws

This is true, I think question of ImageWIS was rhetorical question?

Not at all. Especially when considering that multicore processors and DDR3 RAM is far faster at processing calculations and process than was previously available. At the same time, Windows is not running THAT many new applications that it would somehow require THAT much more processing speed in order to run everything efficiently.

 

[Tokyo Slim]

Win7 32bit runs just fine on less than 4GB of RAM.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

Can you return it ?

Too late to return it. No biggie, I only have one blu-ray DVD in my collection right now. I have a Netflix account which is where I get most of my blu-ray rentals.

 

[A Y]

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

Win7 32bit runs just fine on less than 4GB of RAM.

I run Win7 on an old Thinkpad T42p with 2GB of RAM, and it works great. Before that I was running WinXP on the same computer with 1GB. It worked, but it was tight.

--Andre

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

Win7 32bit runs just fine on less than 4GB of RAM.

But not the 64bit version, correct?

 

[coldarchon]

Originally Posted by hws

I have one with Windows 7 Professional 64, is ok, with 4GB RAM, no so ok with less of 4GB.

alas, a result of the productivity paradoxon in information technology.

win!

 

[Tokyo Slim]

Originally Posted by imageWIS

But not the 64bit version, correct?

I can't really speak to that. I'm not using 64bit.

 

[lakewolf]

Originally Posted by coldarchon

alas, a result of the productivity paradoxon in information technology. win!
actually no. The latest technology enable software to do much more and much easier than before. But obviously it needs more resources. I programed PCs on C back then on windows 3.1, the machines were quick enough for low level programs and even MS Office, ran ok on a PC with 128MB de RAM and a small and slow hard disk. Nowadays you have PCs that are media centers, with Terabytes of disk at disposal, and a whole system based on a managed CLR that is as fast as it was in the past a C program, only much easier to develop in and much more powerful. a PC now with 2GB or 4GB RAM, and a huge disk, costs about the same as what the 128MB PC, 100MB disk costed then. But you can do a lot more now.