
eatnails wrote: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051116-5588.html Speculation is circulating around the 'Net as to which particular PCs will be able to run Windows Vista. Word is that each system's graphics card will determine how smoothly Vista will move. We've reported previously that the OS will support "tiered" graphics. The operating system will be shipping with four different themes, ranging from Classic XP to Aero Glass, with each theme demanding more graphical horsepower. Aero Glass will be the most intense. Microsoft is on record saying that Vista will be intelligent enough to detect what theme should be displayed on the given hardware, but vendors and consumers are wondering exactly which hardware will run the heralded Aero Glass theme without a significant performance sacrifice. Currently, Microsoft is stating that those who wish to push the capabilities of Vista have the following setup: DirectX 9 framework Windows Display Driver Model 32 bits per pixel depth with 64MB of graphics RAM 2.4GHz processor 512MB RAM Graphics card capable of handling Windows Presentation Foundation Supposedly, PCs running Intel's 945 chipset, Intel's upcoming Broadwater chipset, ATI's Radeon Xpress X200, and nVidia's nForce4 will have no issue running the three-dimensional Aero Glass theme. Realistically, only today's fastest, most graphically inclined PCs will be able to handle Aero Glass. Microsoft is warning any buyers in the market now for a PC to make sure that they purchase one with an extra PCI-Express or AGP slot so that they can upgrade in the future. After reading through the requirements, will you be able to run Vista's Aero Glass theme? If not, are you planning on upgrading your system for Aero Glass? Will you wait on upgrading to Vista if you can't run the snazzy UIs? I, for one, would rather watch my PC fly with Classic XP rather than waste system resources on a pretty UI. Then again, by the time I upgrade to Vista, there is a chance that I'll have a system macho enough to meet Aero Glass standards. Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 5:15 pm
admin(Mark) wrote: I don't think mine will. I would love if there is an option to take off all the fancy graphics. I run highend graphics program and the more speed the better. Instead of creating fancy bmp and png interface m$ should convert to vector. That would not only decrease the ui processing but would also create amazing interfaces. Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 8:18 am
EggL wrote: Hi! Ich komme aus Deutschland/Germany und mein PC wirds auch nich schaffen, das neue Windows ist mehr ein Spiel wie ein Betriebssystem! Unglaublich diese Anforderungen! GreeTzzZ EggL edited by admin---English translation[google lang tool] I come from Deutschland/Germany and my PC wirds also nich create, the new Windows am more a play like an operating system! Unbelievably these requirements! Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:25 am
DJHicks wrote: how pathetic and inconsiderate m$ are if these are the true requirements! as its been said, using graphics programs etc you need all the speed and memory you can get! so y create a os that needs so much to run before you put anything on it? they are forcing people to buy new machines as im sure theres been a reduction in pc sales lately! people would be fools to go out and buy this... be interesting to see how many people upgrade to support the software! XP still has a few yrs support left and thus i will stick with it till vista passes... just like i stayed with 98 SE and didnt touch 2000, NT, or ME etc! Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:52 pm
Valejo wrote: I have not heard much about it. But I thought the biggest requirement was that it was needed on a 64bit processor? If this is true then computer sales are going to go up or Vista will be a flop for a few years. Posted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:19 am
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||