New
#1
If this "hackerman1" person wants a real challenge let's see him install 7 on this one! No way in ... 512kb of memory to work with!
Windows 7 Hits a New Low
No not its expectation or usage but its lowest boot specification!!!
Screenshots below:I've always wanted to get a modern operating system to work on my graphing calculator. And we're about there, thanks to the efforts of a fellow (or strangly named lady) on The Windows Club forum. A user by the name of "hackerman1" has installed Windows 7 on his PC, which in itself is nothing to write home about. The catch here is that he's gotten a bootable, working installation on no less than a Pentium II system. No, that's not a typo--Pentium Two. The extreme...ly old machine consists of a 266 MHz CPU, a whopping 96 MB of memory, and a next-generation 4 MB graphics card.
Like a stuntperson who just keeps tempting death by pushing the landing ramp farther and farther back, hackerman1 didn't just stop with that meager system loadout. He continued to alter the memory amount, achieving success with two of three setups: 128 MB and 96 MB. Unfortunately, Windows 7 didn't seem to enjoy only having 64 megabytes of memory to work with, marking hackerman's stopping point with that version of the experiment.
That's not to say that he's planning on stopping for good, however. Next up? A Pentium I machine featuring a 166 MHz CPU paired with a 1 MB graphics card. After that, maybe hackerman1 can break inject some Aero graphics into his trusty abacus. Although he didn't say how long it took him to install or boot the operating system, other forum users have chimed in and timed the installation for a Pentium III-based system at a low 17 continuous hours. And the boot time? 17 minutes.
128 MB memory
96 MB memory
Read more
If this "hackerman1" person wants a real challenge let's see him install 7 on this one! No way in ... 512kb of memory to work with!
I once installed Vista RC1 on a Pentium 4 with 512MB RAM and it ran like crap. My integrated graphics (Intel) didn't help, either.
Vista while being stated as the minimum of 512mb simply meant nothing but the absolute basics. Likewise the older lingo on XP running with only 64mb while MS recommended 128mb came down to the same thing there.
Vista simply was Windows having grown too large in size. Many still look at XP as the crap version while favoring Vista having upgraded from 2000. Meanwhile 7 comes along with a rather MinWin core now seeng running on old boats you wouldn't want Vista on to start with while not the best for XP either.
You know, he is a member here and posted his specs...