Windows Vista
- Thread starter teggyguy
- Start date
- Replies 72
- Views 4K
We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms
i too think you should have 2 gig+ with vista.
personally i just use ubuntu on my server/desktop. its faster and does loads more than vista can. i really dont have anything against vista personally, sure some people have had probs, but i dont think it would keep me from using it. its just not my first choice. really the biggest issue i have is the price. i have NEVER paid for an OS, and i dont plan to. yay open source and XP corp hacks LOL.
personally i just use ubuntu on my server/desktop. its faster and does loads more than vista can. i really dont have anything against vista personally, sure some people have had probs, but i dont think it would keep me from using it. its just not my first choice. really the biggest issue i have is the price. i have NEVER paid for an OS, and i dont plan to. yay open source and XP corp hacks LOL.
endlesszeal
Senior Member
Newegg.com - Memory, DDR, DDR2, DDR3, Memory Stick, Memory Card, Computer Memory, SD Memory Card, Memory Stick Duo, Computer RAM
Like I said, RAM is dirt cheap. Either suck up for the extra $30 for 2GB, turn off all the pretty shit on Vista, switch to a different OS or shut the hell up. Granted an OS that needs 2GB is bullshit, deal with it.
Like I said, RAM is dirt cheap. Either suck up for the extra $30 for 2GB, turn off all the pretty shit on Vista, switch to a different OS or shut the hell up. Granted an OS that needs 2GB is bullshit, deal with it.
now find the cheapest DDR3 2gig
endlesszeal
Senior Member
Thats true to a certain degree. It depends a lot on your hardware and which version of Vista. 64-bit has no problem addressing 4GB or more, but 32-bit, you have to jump through holes to get it. Even then some boards take 512mb of the 4GB and give it to the video card although you may have dedicated one. Thus, you will only see 3.5GB.
Why not Vista unlocked corporate versions?
Wow. Where did you learn about computers?!
Not really- a 32 bit system can only address 4GB of RAM no matter where it is. The more dedicated RAM your video card has, the less system RAM you get to use. Having a video card with dedicated memory on it does not mean that you get more system memory to use- it is exactly the opposite.
So just run a 64 bit OS.
YBLEGAL
Regular Member w/ Cheese
I'm not sure what you mean by "Having a video card with dedicated memory on it does not mean that you get more system memory to use- it is exactly the opposite." because it just frees up system memory.
Anybody play with beta versions of vista much? I had one way back when it was first announced, thru microsoft as a tester, and it was pretty much a 64-bit server 2003 made into a workstation. It was recognized as windows server as well when installing applications. It actually worked pretty well...I'd say better than the final result lol.
Anybody play with beta versions of vista much? I had one way back when it was first announced, thru microsoft as a tester, and it was pretty much a 64-bit server 2003 made into a workstation. It was recognized as windows server as well when installing applications. It actually worked pretty well...I'd say better than the final result lol.
endlesszeal
Senior Member
I think what mike (calesta) meant was that if you go pass or near the 4GB limit, the more memory you stick in the more RAM it'll direct towards the card, even if its not used. For example, there have been cases where you have 4GB install on Vista with a 1GB video card. However, since 32-bit doesnt work well with that much RAM, itll think the video will need another 1GB, thus you end up with 3GB system memory and 2GB video ram, in which, only 1GB is actually being used, which is the 1GB on the card. In the end, if you near 4GB, switch to 64-bit and pray to your gods more support like drivers and such will be geared towards it.
Also, vista is actually based on Server 03 thus explaining why you saw what you saw. It was probably stable because much wasnt done to it. However, since its inception, there have been many changes and you get "aero"
.
Anyway, I think as people upgrade to newer computers that have more ram and processing power, theyll stop bitching about vista. however, except for UAC, that fucker is annoything; but to the myspacing porn prowling junkies out tehre, its a god sent. guest account automated for the dummies! either that or get server 08 or wait for windows 7.
Also, vista is actually based on Server 03 thus explaining why you saw what you saw. It was probably stable because much wasnt done to it. However, since its inception, there have been many changes and you get "aero"
. Anyway, I think as people upgrade to newer computers that have more ram and processing power, theyll stop bitching about vista. however, except for UAC, that fucker is annoything; but to the myspacing porn prowling junkies out tehre, its a god sent. guest account automated for the dummies! either that or get server 08 or wait for windows 7.
Sort of. Freeing up memory isn't the issue.
Not this either.
The 32 bit OS can only address 4 GB of memory. That's it. If you have 4 GB of system RAM and nothing else, you can hit all of it. If you have 1 GB of memory on your video card, then that's included in the addressable 4 GB of memory. Now you have 3 GB of system memory available to you plus the 1 GB on the video card. See how that works?
Sabz5150
FALCON PUNCH!!!
Correct. You start running out of places to put F's
Actually once you use a one button mouse like a mac you'll wonder why windows didn't do something similar.
hover mouse pointer over icon = first click,
click button = 2nd click
This is how I have kubuntu's mouse setting set as well.
now a right click or alt click would be useful for other menu shortcuts but it's not entirely needed since we have keyboard shortcuts
YBLEGAL
Regular Member w/ Cheese
I fucking hate hover for select. Slows down productivity. If your a gamer, or just a fast ass computer user like myself that can fly thru things, it's a burden to wait for the system to select an icon on hover, and low hover time settings cause things to become selected unintentionally. Plus, it's harder to acuratly hold control and select multiple items.
Mac is good for graphic design. It's like the reason you have a stand alone calculator, even though a PC (or mac) can have a calculator. It just works, and it's made for that.
Mac is good for graphic design. It's like the reason you have a stand alone calculator, even though a PC (or mac) can have a calculator. It just works, and it's made for that.
mac's arent even good for graphic design anymore. the PPC based macs are so severely outclassed by walmart laptops and desktops it isnt worth the back pain to buy one. something with leopard and intel based macs just isnt right. its still very buggy.
Similar threads
