Is it just me or does Vista seem to require a new computer?

[RandomFool]

First I find out my sound blaster live card won't be supported by creative, then I hear that nvidia isn't supporting the nforce2 chipset. Not to mention the crazy ram requirements. They did this on purpose didn't they?

 

[Astray]

It's nothing crazy. By todays computer standards you really don't need a very good machine to run Vista.

 

[gerwen]

Originally posted by: RandomFool
First I find out my sound blaster live card won't be supported by creative, then I hear that nvidia isn't supporting the nforce2 chipset. Not to mention the crazy ram requirements. They did this on purpose didn't they?

Doubtful. They don't sell computers, so there's no money to be made there. Price difference between OEM and Upgrade versions is similar, no money to be made there.

They did it just to bug you.

 

[Diogenes2]

Is it just me or does Vista seem to require a new computer?

In your case it does ..


If you are happy with older hardware, why would you need Vista ?

 

[RebateMonger]

Originally posted by: RandomFool
First I find out my sound blaster live card won't be supported by creative...

That sucks.

Creative's Vista Driver Plan

Write them and complain. Tell them you won't buy any more of their cards if they don't support Vista with the Live! series. There's no excuse for not supporting that popular card.

 

[tatteredpotato]

What I don't understand is how whiny everyone gets over "bloat." Computers are getting to the point were speed increases is not noticed in your day to day tasks nearly like it was in the past. MS makes use of all this power and does something with it and all people do is complain. People say Vista "needs" a power graphics processor, but you can always turn off Aero. W/o that your fine running with 512 mb of memory, and 1 gig is plenty for Aero. 2gb is what you want for gaming, but it was pretty much the same under XP.

 

[idiotekniQues]

anandtech has a cover story on this, it does seem to be fairly resource intensive in some ways.

as always, it is best to wait and see before upgrading how others fare. OS requirements are notoriously understated by the purveyors of them.

 

[RebateMonger]

Originally posted by: BlameCanada
People say Vista "needs" a power graphics processor, but you can always turn off Aero. W/o that your fine running with 512 mb of memory, and 1 gig is plenty for Aero. 2gb is what you want for gaming, but it was pretty much the same under XP.

My only copy of Vista is on a 1.8GHz Celeron with 512MB of RAM and an 8MB ATI Rage PCI card (ten-year-old technology). No Aero, no 3-D graphics, and it won't properly play a DVD movie, but it DOES typical "work" tasks just fine.

 

[Shawn]

Originally posted by: RebateMonger

Originally posted by: BlameCanada
People say Vista "needs" a power graphics processor, but you can always turn off Aero. W/o that your fine running with 512 mb of memory, and 1 gig is plenty for Aero. 2gb is what you want for gaming, but it was pretty much the same under XP.

My only copy of Vista is on a 1.8GHz Celeron with 512MB of RAM and an 8MB ATI Rage PCI card (ten-year-old technology). No Aero, no 3-D graphics, and it won't properly play a DVD movie, but it DOES typical "work" tasks just fine.

ouch.

 

[MmmSkyscraper]

It runs pretty well on my 3 year old rig, haven't noticed any difference from XP.

 

[cockeyed]

It runs fine on my 3 yr old system, but the driver support needs to get better before I'm ready to use it full time. AMD/ATI had the video driver ready and Lexmark had the printer driver, but Asus doesn't have Vista drivers for my P4P800, so I had to restore back to my XP system for now. For some strange reason, it wouldn't boot after I would install the MS Vista updates. Also, some of my SW needs to be updated.

Asus P4P800 - P4- 3.0 - 1 gb Ram - ATI 850XT