I just ran the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor on my XP box that I consider to be very basic and really not that good at all. The Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor basically tells me that if I add another 1Gig RAM I am ready to roll with 64 bit
I would not even think of upgrading this box at allSo is MS pushing the boundaries a bit with this, how do you feel
Windows 7 Will run on that system it will Just be Slow and will Lag alot Basically the System hasn't Reached the Required Specs
Hope This Helps,
Josh
I don't want to run W7 on it I just ran the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor to see what it was about and was very surprised to see it would be able to run 64 bit. So the thing is I feel that this may be the source of many a members problem it is telling them all is ok on a system that is basically really ok for only XP.
I think you are over-analyzing, but at the same time, without system specs, there isn't really any way we can tell you how we feel, is there?
Depending on those systems specs, it may run Windows 7 very well. One thing Windows 7 does well, and much better than Vista, is scale down to lesser systems. I'm sure many of us could post some "older" systems that we've been able to get Windows 7 running on just fine, but without knowing the specs of your "older" system, that would all be pointless. I'm not sure what you expect or hope to get out of a thread like this without posting specs.
I was not actualy expecting to get more than how people felt about it. The specs of that PC really was not what it was about. I just personally of the top of my head felt that that box was not one to try and run W7 on. However here are the specs that I have on it right now. It is more a test box I use running XP.
I've always followed the golden rule of taking what Microsoft says are the minimum requirements, and doubling up on everying when possible. So if the OS says it needs "1GB Ram (2 GB Recommended)", I use double the recommended amount, which will be 4GB.I was not actualy expecting to get more than how people felt about it. The specs of that PC really was not what it was about. I just personally of the top of my head felt that that box was not one to try and run W7 on. However here are the specs that I have on it right now. It is more a test box I use running XP.
This rule has worked out well enough for me since Windows 95...
See, here's another example of why I wish people would just post specs, rather than screenshots of what some software tells them. There's no such thing as a Pentium II 2200 Mhz processor. Are there that many people out there that are unaware of what is in their computers...that they built or paid for? This isn't directed at the OP, it is just a mini-rant of mine.
Just post the important details for OS determination like this (as if I was doing so with my current work system):
Intel E6660
Intel DG33FB
4 GB Patriot DDR2 Memory
eVGA 8600 GTS
That's all that's needed. It only takes 5-10 seconds, yet time and time again I see people over-complicating this in many threads.
You see the reason why I posted that was because the PC I was referring to is one in my office and right now I am home. The specs of this PC were not really the issue in my point but were important to you. So only having that available right now being the fact that I had posted it a few days ago in another thread I thought it was reference enough for this conversation
Maybe I am like Dzomlija also rather go for an overkill than battle continuously
I guess that's what confuses me then, that people don't know their specs off the top of their head. I'm at work right now using the tower I mentioned, but I could tell you the specs of my work laptop sitting at home. I could tell you the specs of my clients systems in work and my servers, my wife's laptop, my home server, etc.
But, I also keep a spreadsheet online that has all specs for all of my systems, so I can plan upgrades and hand-me-down paths. They are my computers, so there's no reason why I shouldn't know what's in them...even OEM pre-built systems.
Quote
it is True