painfully slow

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

On a minimum requirment puter. Instalation of hardware and programs is
painfuly slow. (850 MGHZ/512 RAM/128MB PCI VIDEO CARD.)

COULD THIS BE RELATED TO WHAT IS CALLED,

INDEXING???

If so. MS better increase the Minimum requirements to 1.2 mghz or
more..... Or there will be many, many unhappy customers.
 
I honestly do not see someone who has a computer that would cost $150 to
replace with one 3 times as fast forking out $75-$150 or so for Vista.
I don't believe indexing has anything to do with install.


p.s. Please no more ALL CAPS
 
The current Beta2 Vista is full of unoptimized debugging and tracking
software and should not be considered as representative of the performance
of the final product.
 
Zack says:

I honestly do not see someone who has a computer that would cost $150 to
replace with one 3 times as fast forking out $75-$150 or so for Vista.
I don't believe indexing has anything to do with install.
BIA says:
Well Zack.. That's my point. Installing Vista on that old of a machine is
a bad idea.. Why state it meets requirements?
Bought a Full spec 3500+, 64 bit, 1 gig, 200 gig HD, 17â€, printer etc
yesterday, from Best Buy. 550 bucks out the door no rebate required..
But
I wouldn’t expect a price anywhere close to that on a new Vista machine…
But who knows, maybe..
Lots of 850 mghz machines out there that run fine on XP. That will become
anchors on Vista..
Deception makes for bad vibes.. 8:)

JW,
Hope what you are saying is true. But for this slow of a machine. There
would have to be significant performance increases.
 
BIA said:
On a minimum requirment puter. Instalation of hardware and programs is
painfuly slow. (850 MGHZ/512 RAM/128MB PCI VIDEO CARD.)

COULD THIS BE RELATED TO WHAT IS CALLED,

INDEXING???

If so. MS better increase the Minimum requirements to 1.2 mghz or
more..... Or there will be many, many unhappy customers.
Click to expand...

It could be related to an 850mhz machine being too slow for an unoptimized
beta.

Try a computer built this millenium.
 
Tom

Thanks for confirming my thoughts..

I have 7 computers I need six and they are all on XP. As I said this is my
slowest computer. just bought a 3500+ Sunday. I am not going to instal Vista
on any of them until more drivers are available.

As I said. The 850 is stated on the box to meet the minimum requirements...
I think that is misleading..

Maybe that is just me...

Now for the good news.. I like the looks of the OS. I like the add ons
that come with the OS. And considering that it is a Beta. I think I would
buy the final release... But only for a 2 ghrtz machine with a gig of ram.
(Some even complain this is slow. ) Or on a new machine..

Thanks
 
The problem is that 850 might be the minimum when it is done, but it isn't
tuned for performance yet.

But XP says it will run in 128MB. It will run, as long as you don't want to
do anything.

Tom
 
Well Tom, You most likely are right again.
But..
Dummying down a Beta, so widely downloaded. With test software that kills
performance. Is going to be a huge issue when the final release comes out.
People tend to believe what they see, more than what they hear. And what
they see with this beta. Is that any processor below 2.0 w/ 1gig of ram is a
anchor.
MS big money/item, is the sale of OS to the public. Not OEM. Can’t believe
they envision dropping public sales..
 
Back
Top