Windows 8 Will Have Same System Reqs as Win 7

[apache_lives]

[citation][nom]Northwestern[/nom]To confirm it was Nvidia's fault, I had a Dell XPS M1530. My first laptop and at the time, I didn't know crap about anything. Within my second year the laptop started going down the crapper, everything started to come apart and without even diagnosing the thing, I rendered it Vista's fault. Today, however I have moved on from that laptop. After some research, I found my laptop had been plagued by a faulty Nvidia chip which fried the motherboard. 98% of the problems I encountered was because of the chip, not the OS, while 1% was viruses. I admit, Vista had it's share of problems as the final 1% was Vista's fault. Though Vista just came out when computers weren't as great.[/citation]

So what was that 1% - what problems did it cause you?

[citation][nom]iamtheking123[/nom]If there's no XP mode option (also known as the power-user mode) for the GUI then MS can go eff themselves.[/citation]

Why do you need it? How do you call yourself a power-user?

[citation][nom]GreaseMonkey_62[/nom]Some Atom processors are 64bit, but the majority of them are still 32bit. The "high end" Atom processors are 64bit, but manufacturers don't want to pay for them.[/citation]

Its the other way around the majority of the current Atom's ARE 64-bit

 

[apache_lives]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]I have an 8 year old laptop with a single core and 1Gb ram that runs Windows 7 just great, I reckon it will have a run out for the next 4 years if I use Windows 8 on it as well.Gotta love that.[/citation]

Most Pentium M's are still still quicker then atoms!

 

[ravewulf]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]...Also since most applications are 32 bits and 32 bit applications under windows 64 bits are run using WOW64, an x86 emulator, which usually makes them run slower than on a windows 32 bits. On a more powerful hardware this is a bit irrelevant, but on an underpowered atom the difference can be great.[/citation]
WOW64 is only an emulator if you are running an Intel Itanium (IA-64) processor. On all other processors WOW64 simply switches the processor into 32-bit mode. No emulation at all.

 

[cpatel1987]

[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]Oh yeah? I had Vista Home Basic and Win 7 Ultimate running smooth on a 6-year old 1.8 GHz single-core Celeron M laptop with 1 GB RAM. I'd say that proves you wrong - you don't need latest hardware to run Windows. Common silly belief, just like all other myths about Windows - you won't believe how much $h!t I've heard about Windows from Linux geeks, yet Win 7 still runs better on my netbook than Ubuntu 10, and is more stable. So stop accusing Microsoft and go find out what you're doing wrong.[/citation]

Totally agree. I actually installed Ubuntu once just to see what the big deal was on a laptop. It may have boot faster, but it ran slower on common tasks than Windows 7 did.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]ravewulf[/nom]WOW64 is only an emulator if you are running an Intel Itanium (IA-64) processor. On all other processors WOW64 simply switches the processor into 32-bit mode. No emulation at all.[/citation]
Sorry but no, Windows 64 bits can't run 32 bit code natively independently if the CPU supports 32 bits or not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WoW64
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa384249%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg463051

 

[captaincharisma]

[citation][nom]clonazepam[/nom]Windows ME offered next to nothing over Windows 98 but was great timing for their xbox project.Windows 8 may/may not add much over Windows 7 but is great timing for their next xbox project.[/citation]

umm.what???

 

[jchambers2586]

I think windows 8 will be a fail like windows vista was. They way Microsoft has worked so far very other OS that came out has been good. EX windows vista was trash so they came out with windows 7. Here is my 2 cents Windows 8 will be trash so they have to come out with some thing to replace windows8. I am happy with windows 7 I am not going to windows 8 unless I have to.

 

[apache_lives]

[citation][nom]jchambers2586[/nom]I think windows 8 will be a fail like windows vista was. They way Microsoft has worked so far very other OS that came out has been good. EX windows vista was trash so they came out with windows 7. Here is my 2 cents Windows 8 will be trash so they have to come out with some thing to replace windows8. I am happy with windows 7 I am not going to windows 8 unless I have to.[/citation]

its not even out and your calling it a vista?

you do know vista and 7 work the same and are 90% the same right?

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

im a gamer, the only way i would get 8 is if the rumor that it can play 360 games is true, which i highly doubt. would love to get rid of my 360. but unless thats true ill stick with xp. a good motherboard is 200-400$ thats not cheap in my book, now if you are looking at budget 30-50$ motherboards i can see why you are confused. besides, its nice not needing to completely rebuild a computer from ground up just to use a newer processor.





XP?

You still use that festering piece of crap?

Your not serious are you?

?

What motherboard cost 400?
..



windows xp is not a festering piece of crap, it still runs fastr thaan windows 7, and is very easy to fix, unlike vista, all my games still run on xp, especially on my laptop because of limited hardware.

 

[apache_lives]

[citation][nom]TheinsanegamerN[/nom]windows xp is not a festering piece of crap, it still runs fastr thaan windows 7, and is very easy to fix, unlike vista, all my games still run on xp, especially on my laptop because of limited hardware.[/citation]

you must be living under a rock or something, xp is dead - it is NOT quick you have no idea what quick means

easy to fix - why? i dont have to "fix" anything in windows 7 its all there i can use my hardware to its full potential, everything is supported

i have more games that dont run on xp (latest + ancient games - win9x only) then i do with windows 7 - dont give me that crap - most will have vista patches (works for 7 the same)

you should youtube "windows mojave" 😉 your one of those people

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

windws 7 is the best system that i have ever used. all my programs, except for knights of the old republic run fine. instead of windows 8, let me make a few suggestions for MS executives.
1. offer a service pack that can make the gi look like windows xp, so users don't have to learn new interface if they don't want
2. lower system requirements for win 7 by getting rid of useless features, like the aero interface.
3. offer better support

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

[citation][nom]TheinsanegamerN[/nom]windws 7 is the best system that i have ever used. all my programs, except for knights of the old republic run fine. instead of windows 8, let me make a few suggestions for MS executives. 1. offer a service pack that can make the gi look like windows xp, so users don't have to learn new interface if they don't want2. lower system requirements for win 7 by getting rid of useless features, like the aero interface.3. offer better support[/citation]

if this was done, the 50% of the market or so that uses xp would buy wiindows 7, thus instant profit... hello

 

[apache_lives]

[citation][nom]TheinsanegamerN[/nom]windws 7 is the best system that i have ever used. all my programs, except for knights of the old republic run fine. instead of windows 8, let me make a few suggestions for MS executives. 1. offer a service pack that can make the gi look like windows xp, so users don't have to learn new interface if they don't want2. lower system requirements for win 7 by getting rid of useless features, like the aero interface.3. offer better support[/citation]

Windows 7 interface works 10000x better then xp's interface, at the same time ITS THE SAME THING THERES NOTHING HARD ABOUT IT - START MENU AND DESKTOP - why would they go backwards?

Lower system requirements? again WHY - runs fine on anything current, no one cares about some pile of garbage thats 5+ years old - get with the times, old computers can stick with XP thats fine they were ment for each other.

Useless features - windows is for a broard platform and variety of things and has to work with everything. The "useless" features there are not useless they may be useless to you but others use the features.

As for aero - go look at benchmarks on vs off - it actually makes use of the otherwise idle GPU, offloading more to it - it works.

I work on 30+ computers a day, its always the xp machines that take the longest to do things, cause the most issues, wont perform tasks, and require too much effort for what there worth - there a dying breed.

To my customers at my shop, if there using xp and if there system supports windows 7 i push it and get them upgraded, if there computer cant handle windows 7 i sell them a new one - im killing xp off one pc at a time, and they never complain about how to use windows 7 it just works - old and young it doesnt matter, they take it, accept it, they love it.

Ill be happy when XP is totally abandoned, activation unavailable, updates unavailable, and no supporting hardware or programs - im sick of supporting Vista and 7 (same everything - drivers, software) and then having to keep supporting the old crap... then again i charge ALOT more to fix/work with any XP machine - forces people up

 

[apache_lives]

[citation][nom]TheinsanegamerN[/nom]if this was done, the 50% of the market or so that uses xp would buy wiindows 7, thus instant profit... hello[/citation]

And errr... if you did that, everyone would think its just another xp and not upgrade at all, things would crawl to a halt

You do know todays low low ram prices are all thanks to 64-bit Vista and 7 right? They create demand for memory, high density etc.

 

[apache_lives]

[citation][nom]applegetsmelaid[/nom]No 128-Bit?[/citation]

LOL not for a while me thinks - 32-bit was introduced in ~1985 - The Intel 386 and this is why im angry that theres STILL a 32-bit version of windows what, 26 years later?!?! (not that there the same compatible 32-bit platform etc)

 

[Christopher1]

[citation][nom]apache_lives[/nom]The issue with Vista wasnt Vista is was companies like Acer etc that sold units with 512mb of memory and packed it with so much useless junk it just crawled, vista if properly setup was great, i would still take vista over XP any day, and windows 7 - its 99% vista.As for Windows 8, WHY IS IT NOT 64 BIT ONLY FFSKILL 32-BIT ALREADY[/citation]

They don't want to kill 32-bit Windows because so many cheap companies still use 32-bit systems because they haven't gone the way of the dodo yet.

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

They don't want to kill 32-bit Windows because so many cheap companies still use 32-bit systems because they haven't gone the way of the dodo yet.

This again?! The 32-bit old stuff should just stay on XP or 7, period! If your hardware is old, OS upgrade won't do any good - in fact, it's more likely to screw you over because of driver compatibility/support.

The REAL reason why they wouldn't kill 32-bit is because MS's hoping to sell the new OS even to those outdated machines' owners due to the owners' lack of knowledge (i.e. they don't get that OS upgrade is useless for them and thus go for it). If you meant that, then I agree with you fully. If you meant that MS wants to "support" the old hardware as well, I disagree strongly

 

[Guest]

Now if we can get major hardware manufacturers, e.g., H-P, to provide drivers for their stuff when Microsoft upgrades their OS. If not "forever" (Win95 to Win-7 is unreasonable expectation), at least for 2 to 3 major OS upgrades (XP to Win-7 or win-8 is a very reasonable expectation). While one may not now have to buy a new computer for every OS upgrade, having to do it for peripheral hardware is unacceptable.

 

[hpfreak]

Does this mean eventually Microsoft will release an Operating System compatible with my TI-82 calculator?