Hi

After looking at various comments about Vista it is quite clear to me that
Vista runs very well on a GOOD PC. Something like a quad processor and
enough 800mhz memory plus a fast front end bus.

It does not perform well on PC's that are short of resources.



It is no use to tell people to go to Linux etc instead of elaborating about
the hardware being used.

Piet

im not useing a quad processor and my vista premium kicks ass on my pc! my
processor is a single core and its fast enough to run vista games with no
probs.
"Piet" <pietfo@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:80DD8857-7E85-4008-BE7C-D56319BD3D52@xxxxxx

> Hi
>
> After looking at various comments about Vista it is quite clear to me that
> Vista runs very well on a GOOD PC. Something like a quad processor and
> enough 800mhz memory plus a fast front end bus.
>
> It does not perform well on PC's that are short of resources.
>
> It is no use to tell people to go to Linux etc instead of elaborating
> about the hardware being used.
>
> Piet
>
>

I'm with you Roy its all in the preparation, I run Premium on 2core Intel 6320, 2 gb ram and Radeon 1650, and it whistles through it.

Thats not top of the line spec, I'd call it a good average for Vista.

Quad processor? That's a bit extreme, I think. I've had it running on a
single core processor at about 2gHz with 1GB of memory and have been pretty
pleased with the result for everyday use.

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@xxxxxx
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/


"Piet" <pietfo@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:80DD8857-7E85-4008-BE7C-D56319BD3D52@xxxxxx

> Hi
>
> After looking at various comments about Vista it is quite clear to me that
> Vista runs very well on a GOOD PC. Something like a quad processor and
> enough 800mhz memory plus a fast front end bus.
>
> It does not perform well on PC's that are short of resources.
>
> It is no use to tell people to go to Linux etc instead of elaborating
> about the hardware being used.
>
> Piet
>
>

[quote=Richard G. Harper;609067]Quad processor? That's a bit extreme, I think. I've had it running on a
single core processor at about 2gHz with 1GB of memory and have been pretty
pleased with the result for everyday use.

Stick another gig of memory in and see the difference.

"Piet" <pietfo@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:80DD8857-7E85-4008-BE7C-D56319BD3D52@xxxxxx

> Hi
>
> After looking at various comments about Vista it is quite clear to me that
> Vista runs very well on a GOOD PC. Something like a quad processor and
> enough 800mhz memory plus a fast front end bus.
>
> It does not perform well on PC's that are short of resources.
>
> It is no use to tell people to go to Linux etc instead of elaborating
> about the hardware being used.
>
> Piet
>
>

Vista performs well on a system where there are ample resources and where
the individual components and software have decent support from the
manufacturers/authors.

A single core machine will run Vista very well. There is no requirement to
have quad core, although it would be nice of course..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

You posted a message with a poor subject/title. It is very generic and
doesn't tell anybody anything or ask anything of anyone. It's just a
pointless statement.

Stating that Vista runs on a "Good PC" is also a useless statement. It is
very relative and makes little sense. A "Good PC" to one person mail still
fail all system requirements to run Vista. It doesn't change the fact that
the system is a "Good PC", it just means it can't run Vista.

On the other side, a "Great PC", one being better than a "Good PC", still
may have issues running Vista, simply because the "greatness" or "goodness"
has never been an indicator of how a computer would run a certain operating
system.



"Piet" <pietfo@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:80DD8857-7E85-4008-BE7C-D56319BD3D52@xxxxxx

> Hi
>
> After looking at various comments about Vista it is quite clear to me that
> Vista runs very well on a GOOD PC. Something like a quad processor and
> enough 800mhz memory plus a fast front end bus.
>
> It does not perform well on PC's that are short of resources.
>
> It is no use to tell people to go to Linux etc instead of elaborating
> about the hardware being used.
>
> Piet
>
>

/Piet/ said:

> Hi
>
> After looking at various comments about Vista it is quite clear to me that
> Vista runs very well on a GOOD PC. Something like a quad processor and
> enough 800mhz memory plus a fast front end bus.
>
> It does not perform well on PC's that are short of resources.
>
> It is no use to tell people to go to Linux etc instead of elaborating about
> the hardware being used.
>
> Piet

Echoing others who have responded, this is a four-year old Pentium 4
with a NVidia 5200 (128) video card...
I do not game or use video-intensive applications, but do run the usual
programs, scanner/printer typical of many users. A 22" LCD is in service.

Truthfully, I have never seen a machine that is more responsive than
this one, even at the office. (Probably because of all the
virus/malware checking there). XP, also on this box, feels similarly
responsive. For my purposes, there is no pressing need for quad
architecture at this time.