[Smith6612]

Here's something that Microsoft did to try to catch people off guard. They told people that on a computer with Windows Vista installed, that Windows 7 was installed called Windows Mojave. Here's what happened.

*NOTE* Not dial-up friendly or slow computer friendly!

http://www.mojaveexperiment.com/

[masteraa]

I found that a week or go, I do wonder though how doctored up the entire thing is. I know several people first hand that were like that. They disliked vista untill they actually started to use it.

[Spartan Erik]

Once someone goes and finds out the hardware Microsoft used to run those Vista computers, Vista will be discredited once again. Some of the responses don't seem genuine, and they are all soundbytes of the positive points (as you never get to hear the full conversation)

[Smith6612]

Originally Posted by Spartan Erik

Once someone goes and finds out the hardware Microsoft used to run those Vista computers, Vista will be discredited once again. Some of the responses don't seem genuine, and they are all soundbytes of the positive points (as you never get to hear the full conversation)

You do know that Vista doesn't need as much as people say it needs, right? I can run Vista on a cheap $300 system from Best Buy (one with a cheapo Sempron AMD CPU, 512MB of RAM and a 180GB P-ATA hard drive and an on-board video card). Sure it'll run a little sluggish, but if you think XP is fast, try running that on a box with a 533Mhz Athlon processor with 90MB of RAM and a first gen P-ATA drive working in 16-bit mode. It is as sluggish as heck!

[Nathan H]

Don't forget as well, vista was designed for current hardware, not aging stuff., on new computerss vista runs completely fine with no problems. i spent about £400 ($800) on my computer and it runs like a dream. Admittedly i can't wait for my £300($600) upgrades i have lined up, but thats to make games run faster. Vista it self is fine till you fill up the background processes.

[vigge_sWe]

Heard it the first day I think on stumbleupon. Pretty fun lol

[Spartan Erik]

Originally Posted by Smith6612

You do know that Vista doesn't need as much as people say it needs, right? I can run Vista on a cheap $300 system from Best Buy (one with a cheapo Sempron AMD CPU, 512MB of RAM and a 180GB P-ATA hard drive and an on-board video card). Sure it'll run a little sluggish, but if you think XP is fast, try running that on a box with a 533Mhz Athlon processor with 90MB of RAM and a first gen P-ATA drive working in 16-bit mode. It is as sluggish as heck!

I could run Vista on my 2.33 GHz C2D 4 MB L2, 512 MB 8800GT and 2 GB of RAM easily. The reason I don't is because statistically on comparable machines, Vista is slower in the all the various functions that XP performs

http://news.cnet.com/Windows-XP-outs...3-6220201.html

I value performance over aesthetics. Since I can patch XP's uxtheme.dll file, I've got aesthetics covered, so I've got the best of both worlds