Gaming Windows 7

[CorruptedAngel]

no u missunderstood me. they first started making "minwin" which was the 1 with low requirements, BUT THEN they scrapped all that and said they would "build on vista" so basicly it is likely the new version will be EVEN MORE ram/HD hungry than vista....

phycoblaster, the reason they should scrap it all and start again is because vista was fundimentaly brocken in the way it was coded. A linux box "somehow" manages to do much fancyer things with compiz, and still has very low ram requirements and you dont need a alright graphics card to do them

 

[Jiggah]

Why not just improve vista rather than making a new os?

They are going to do that, too. The SP2 version of Vista is undergoing BETA testing right now. It will feature some of the improvements found in Windows 7, like the easy wireless connection. However, other improvements like resource management must be coded from the ground up.

Winmin is already included in Vista, and is essentially part of the Vista kernel and what Win 7 is built around. This has been clarified a while back already. They aren't U-turning from anything.

From what was demoed, it suppose to be able to run completely smooth on a netbook, which at this point should be the minimum for any computer. They even had a live demonstration on an EEE, or what looks like an EEE. It also looks like they are trying to plan this around a new refresh of commerical products by having support for new hardware built-in like wireless USB, multi-touch monitors, etc.

 

[CorruptedAngel]

well as far as i can see vista was definately NOT a minwin, it was the most power hungry os yet

 

[Maz7006]

they showed demos of it running on 25 meg of ram.... using only 40meg HD space....

If they really can achieve that, I'm so upgrading from XP.

Same. I only have vista on my gaming comp, since SLi support is much better on Vista.... hopefully this new OS will be better.

 

[mkoo]

Bah. I don't want a drastically changed UI. It would takes ages to get used to it.
I still see no real reason to upgrade my old good XP unless they introduce Minwin or WinFS.

 

[Deleted User]

I have TinyVista atm on one PC, and Vista Home Premium on another... if they can make it use as little CPU and HDD Space as TinyVista, I'll be one happy Warmijwilf.

 

[Jiggah]

I have TinyVista atm on one PC, and Vista Home Premium on another... if they can make it use as little CPU and HDD Space as TinyVista, I'll be one happy Warmijwilf.

This is assuming you're using one of the newer GPUs, Win 7 will introduce GPU acceleration (not 3D acceleration), but processing like CUDA. This will allow the GPU to process some information allowing the system to take loads off the CPU.

 

[psycoblaster]

I hate the task bar. I'm used to the taskbar with each of my active stuff on it.
I hate vista. Its game support sucks. The security thing is too strong. Everytime I start a program, the freaking security thing makes it annoying.
I don't like the file browser. Especially the "my computer". It's too hard to look for the folder you are looking for.
I'll stay with XP. I hope an XP 2009 or something like that come out. Or an XP OS for the vista/windows 7.

 

[Deleted User]

I hate the task bar. I'm used to the taskbar with each of my active stuff on it.
I hate vista. Its game support sucks. The security thing is too strong. Everytime I start a program, the freaking security thing makes it annoying.
I don't like the file browser. Especially the "my computer". It's too hard to look for the folder you are looking for.
I'll stay with XP. I hope an XP 2009 or something like that come out. Or an XP OS for the vista/windows 7.

Game support is great on Vista for me... depends what kind of computer you have, to be honest

 

[War]

Looks pretty ugly IMO. I hope they make some UI changes by the time it's released.

 

[DarkRey]

the beta is out!! but i wont*cough*download*cough*it...
im happy with tinyvista ultimate

 

[Trolly]

Only the old beta with nothing changed from Windows Vista is up right now. No beta version with the new taskbar or anything like that is available. Sorry to disappoint folks!

 

[AeroHex]

i hope it isnt a big ass fail as vista

as psycoblaster said yes the security sucks ive had vista and thats really anoying

along with when i over-write some files i have to go though everyone of them

 

[rscarrab]

Personally i think it will be a while till Windows 7 arrives (like a full Vista life-cycle). Vista will continue to be patched after SP2 drops which will benefit Windows 7; Vista will be used as the guinea pig. Both O/S's have a few similarities which can be tried an tested through Vista. What i'm wondering is when full 64-bit support becomes the norm and 32-bit starts getting pushed out. Then everyone can take advantage of that extra RAM (4-32gigs).

I only just recently got a new Q9400 @ 2.66ghz w/ 4gig's & dual nv 9600's (sli).
I read and was quite distraught; that i wouldn't be able to take advantage of the full 4 gig's (Vista Premium x32), especially since I have two 512mb 9600's which would actually leave me with 3 gig's or possibly 2.75 gig's (of RAM). Where-as on the other hand if i only had one 512mb graphics card than i'd most likely be left with 3.5 gig's (im not sure how to say it exactly but i think it has something to do with addressing the extra GPU memory, the more you got the less RAM you end up with).

Now i know that Vista 32-bit isn't mathematically able to push past 4gig's of RAM, though work around's have been done (changing the PAE i think i read, though it can cause conflicts) and I didn't want to make the jump to x64 and i still don't either, why? Because fortunately for me my Vista is displaying the 4gig's and is in fact using them.

That had me quite surprised since i read a lot of topics and found no-one with the full 4gig's enabled and functioning (and without the use of PAE). Closest anyone got was 3.75 and those with sli configurations were suffering the most at 2/2.5 gig's.

What has me so interested about Windows 7 is whether or not it inspires everyone to make the jump to 64-bit (more so the developers, not you lot!) so that we get to a stage where there is more support for x64 than x32. One can only dream...

(btw, my rig came with Vista SP1 pre-installed with Vista Home Premium x32 w/ 4 gig's running out of the box, it was pre-configured, not by me. So i can't help you if your looking for any advice on using full the 4gig's on Vista x32)

 

[Joe88]

I have two 512mb 9600's which would actually leave me with 3 gig's or possibly 2.75 gig's (of RAM). Where-as on the other hand if i only had one 512mb graphics card than i'd most likely be left with 3.5 gig's (im not sure how to say it exactly but i think it has something to do with addressing the extra GPU memory, the more you got the less RAM you end up with).

the GPU memory has no effect on your actual ram
you can add 4GB in GPU by using 2 4870 x2's in crossfire and would not affect the limit on your actual ram

 

[xJonny]

It would be interesting if it was 64-bit only.

Windows 7 sounds over-hyped because Windows Vista was over...criticized?

 

[rscarrab]

I have two 512mb 9600's which would actually leave me with 3 gig's or possibly 2.75 gig's (of RAM). Where-as on the other hand if i only had one 512mb graphics card than i'd most likely be left with 3.5 gig's (im not sure how to say it exactly but i think it has something to do with addressing the extra GPU memory, the more you got the less RAM you end up with).

the GPU memory has no effect on your actual ram
you can add 4GB in GPU by using 2 4870 x2's in crossfire and would not affect the limit on your actual ram

I was under the impression it was due to hardware address space reservation? Is there an exception for a crossfire setup as opposed to an sli?

 

[coolbho3000]

I have two 512mb 9600's which would actually leave me with 3 gig's or possibly 2.75 gig's (of RAM). Where-as on the other hand if i only had one 512mb graphics card than i'd most likely be left with 3.5 gig's (im not sure how to say it exactly but i think it has something to do with addressing the extra GPU memory, the more you got the less RAM you end up with).

the GPU memory has no effect on your actual ram
you can add 4GB in GPU by using 2 4870 x2's in crossfire and would not affect the limit on your actual ram

Yes, I do believe it does, if you have 32-bit XP/Vista, 4GB of memory, and 512MB of video RAM your graphics card shows 3.5GB at maximum.

 

[DeMoN]

Does anyone think Microsoft will be kind enough to offer free upgrades from Vista to this? In my opinion, this is more of a Vista update than a brand new OS

 

[rscarrab]

I have two 512mb 9600's which would actually leave me with 3 gig's or possibly 2.75 gig's (of RAM). Where-as on the other hand if i only had one 512mb graphics card than i'd most likely be left with 3.5 gig's (im not sure how to say it exactly but i think it has something to do with addressing the extra GPU memory, the more you got the less RAM you end up with).

the GPU memory has no effect on your actual ram
you can add 4GB in GPU by using 2 4870 x2's in crossfire and would not affect the limit on your actual ram

Yes, I do believe it does, if you have 32-bit XP/Vista, 4GB of memory, and 512MB of video RAM your graphics card shows 3.5GB at maximum.

That's why i was gobsmacked when i checked and saw 4 gig's of RAM! I was expecting (or hoping to see at least) 3.5gb.