jackso11 Posted January 28, 2010 Author Share Posted January 28, 2010 got it installed now, for anyone who is thinking about getting it....do, its brilliant! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Top stuff. It is possibly the easiest version of windows to install and it looks as good as Vista with the stability of XP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2 MSW Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Top stuff. It is possibly the easiest version of windows to install and it looks as good as Vista with the stability of XP. Any more importantly the performance of XP too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 driver support for 64bit seems to be very poor. I am running this on two machines now (one virtual) and agree with the above two posts. imi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2 MSW Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 driver support for 64bit seems to be very poor. I am running this on two machines now (one virtual) and agree with the above two posts. imi Can agree with that although if 64 bit drivers are avaialble for Vista 8/10 times they will alos work in windows 7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 I think the driver availability for 64bit Windows 7 is fantastic. I really struggled with XP 64 and didn't have the best of times with Vista 64 but the database is now fantastic. I run 3 PC's on the 64bit version and I would estimate 90% of the drivers are there for me straight from the install. Imi, was it not yourself that couldn't see the point of windows 7? Could be wrong, remember having a debate with someone about the OS in a previous thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 What's the minimum that people would recommend installing 7 on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 What's the minimum that people would recommend installing 7 on? Decent processor, core2, quad core or an AMD variant. 2gb of Ram Compatible gfx card. You can get away with less but the above will be fairly plucky and you will get all the Aero niceties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Decent processor, core2, quad core or an AMD variant. 2gb of Ram Compatible gfx card. You can get away with less but the above will be fairly plucky and you will get all the Aero niceties. Well that's me out, I've got the 2gb of RAM and the graphics but only a 3.2 mhz single core processor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2 MSW Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 What's the minimum that people would recommend installing 7 on? Ive got it running in a virtual environment with under half whats been recommended above and it runs perfect. As mentioned if you want all the nice aero features your need a decent graphics processor with driver that are on the MS compatibility list for windows 7. It does benefit from memory though so 2 Gb as a minimum I would say. Also prior to SP1 it ties up alot of disk space and backups to updates are all stored and can take up to 30GB of space - there is sod all you can do about it till SP1 comes out either. Right now my backups and system restore points are in excess of 16GB It will run on that CPU though no issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Ive got it running in a virtual environment with under half whats been recommended above and it runs perfect. As mentioned if you want all the nice aero features your need a decent graphics processor with driver that are on the MS compatibility list for windows 7. It does benefit from memory though so 2 Gb as a minimum I would say. Also prior to SP1 it ties up alot of disk space and backups to updates are all stored and can take up to 30GB of space - there is sod all you can do about it till SP1 comes out either. Right now my backups and system restore points are in excess of 16GB It will run on that CPU though no issues. So you're saying that it would be alright on mine then? My graphics card is a 256mb and I have 1TB of HD space Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2 MSW Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 So you're saying that it would be alright on mine then? My graphics card is a 256mb and I have 1TB of HD space The OS itself will run fine. The make of graphics card and driver availabilty will dictate what level of user experience you will be able to enable and if you can use the aero feature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 So you're saying that it would be alright on mine then? My graphics card is a 256mb and I have 1TB of HD space Will be absolutely fine. 3.2ghz processor will run just dandy with it. I ran vista on a 3.2ghz laptop and it ran perfect, Windows 7 uses less resources. Either higher single core processors (like yours) or lower dual cores would be the recommended minimum. As far as laptops go I have seen quite a few 1.6 dual cores running Windows 7 just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Imi, was it not yourself that couldn't see the point of windows 7? Could be wrong, remember having a debate with someone about the OS in a previous thread. Not that cant see the point of it, not sure why everyone is raving about it too much (perhaps Vista was such a huge disappointment that demands compensation). its an improvement over XP but not by a huge margin. and they set out to conquer the world with their bloated software yet again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJI Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 If you fancy a change from the Bill Gates domination of operating systems then a refreshing alternative is Linux Ubuntu: http://www.ubuntu.com/ I've had this installed on my laptop for a while now and runs MUCH faster and with much less hassel than any previous windows operating system I've used in the past. Oh yeah, its totally free! And comes with a nice selection of installed software and a large list of available software alternatives to the usual microsoft stuff. (All free also). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 I did think about running Linux, but AutoCAD doesn't run on it, so I have to stick with Windows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.