vista capable what does mean 512mb

Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

"Franz" wrote in message

Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

Considering that 512MB is the minimum for decent performance in XP, I'd say it's the bare minimum to just install Vista. If you actually want to run apps, then get more.
Tom Lake

512MB to have the operating system run applications, work with system services and other things in a *timely fashion*. It also means that it's enough to have hardware working on memory instead of the pagefile.
It's just a nice amount of RAM to have :o) 1GB is recommended though.
-- Zack Whittaker » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared that up!
--: Original message follows :-- "Franz" wrote in message

Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

Its a recommended amount to run both the operating system and applications without reaching a bottle neck in performance. But 512 MB could be mean in addition to processor and graphics speed. You could be using onboard graphics which possibly be borrowing from your physical memory which could slow things down considerably. -- -- Andre Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
"Franz" wrote in message

Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

re:

It's just a nice amount of RAM to have :o) 1GB is recommended though.

I can hardly wait for Windows 2010 and its 4GB "recommended" RAM.
;-)

Juan ==== "Zack Whittaker" wrote in message

512MB to have the operating system run applications, work with system services and other things in a *timely fashion*. It also means that it's enough to have hardware working on memory instead of the pagefile.
It's just a nice amount of RAM to have :o) 1GB is recommended though.
-- Zack Whittaker » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared that up!
--: Original message follows :-- "Franz" wrote in message Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

Which brings to mind some Bill Gates quotes:
"640k should be enough for everyone"
"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1000 MPG"
-- Peter Toronto, Canada 2 x XP Pro SP2 (1 everyday, 1 for testing) P4 HT @ 3.0ghz, 2.0gb DDR, 360gb HD "Juan T. Llibre" wrote in message

re: It's just a nice amount of RAM to have :o) 1GB is recommended though.
I can hardly wait for Windows 2010 and its 4GB "recommended" RAM.
;-)

Juan ==== "Zack Whittaker" wrote in message 512MB to have the operating system run applications, work with system services and other things in a *timely fashion*. It also means that it's enough to have hardware working on memory instead of the pagefile.
It's just a nice amount of RAM to have :o) 1GB is recommended though.
-- Zack Whittaker » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared that up!
--: Original message follows :-- "Franz" wrote in message Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

Peter wrote:

Which brings to mind some Bill Gates quotes:
"640k should be enough for everyone"
"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1000 MPG"

I thought for it to be a quote it had to be something the person actually said, not just an urban legend.

Weeelll, who really cares, just thought I'd throw it in.
-- Peter Toronto, Canada 2 x XP Pro SP2 (1 everyday, 1 for testing) P4 HT @ 3.0ghz, 2.0gb DDR, 360gb HD "Robert Moir" wrote in message

Peter wrote: Which brings to mind some Bill Gates quotes:
"640k should be enough for everyone"
"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1000 MPG"
I thought for it to be a quote it had to be something the person actually said, not just an urban legend.

Aye, that was a misconstrude quote - apparently he never said it and there's no documentation or evidence to show otherwise ;o)
-- Zack Whittaker » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared that up!
--: Original message follows :-- "Peter" wrote in message

Which brings to mind some Bill Gates quotes:
"640k should be enough for everyone"
"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1000 MPG"
-- Peter Toronto, Canada 2 x XP Pro SP2 (1 everyday, 1 for testing) P4 HT @ 3.0ghz, 2.0gb DDR, 360gb HD "Juan T. Llibre" wrote in message re: It's just a nice amount of RAM to have :o) 1GB is recommended though.
I can hardly wait for Windows 2010 and its 4GB "recommended" RAM.
;-)

Juan ==== "Zack Whittaker" wrote in message 512MB to have the operating system run applications, work with system services and other things in a *timely fashion*. It also means that it's enough to have hardware working on memory instead of the pagefile.
It's just a nice amount of RAM to have :o) 1GB is recommended though.
-- Zack Whittaker » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared that up!
--: Original message follows :-- "Franz" wrote in message Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

512 MB's of RAM Required, 1 Giga Byte of RAM Recomended, just FYI.
"Franz" wrote in message

Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

Andre, I ran the Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor (on a 32-Bit Computer) and it says the Following:
512 MB's of RAM Required, 1 GB of RAM Recomended, just FYI.
"Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" wrote in message

Its a recommended amount to run both the operating system and applications without reaching a bottle neck in performance. But 512 MB could be mean in addition to processor and graphics speed. You could be using onboard graphics which possibly be borrowing from your physical memory which could slow things down considerably. -- -- Andre Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
"Franz" wrote in message Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

512 MB's of RAM is Required for OS Installation, 1 GB of RAM is Recomended by Microsoft, just FYI.
"Zack Whittaker" wrote in message

512MB to have the operating system run applications, work with system services and other things in a *timely fashion*. It also means that it's enough to have hardware working on memory instead of the pagefile.
It's just a nice amount of RAM to have :o) 1GB is recommended though.
-- Zack Whittaker » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared that up!
--: Original message follows :-- "Franz" wrote in message Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.

512 MB's of RAM is Required for OS Installation, 1 GB of RAM is Recomended by Microsoft, just FYI.
"Tom Lake" wrote in message

"Franz" wrote in message Is 512MB the minimum amount of memory to install the OS? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS only without other user's applications? Or is 512MB a good amount of memory to run OS + the other user's applications? It's not clear.
Considering that 512MB is the minimum for decent performance in XP, I'd say it's the bare minimum to just install Vista. If you actually want to run apps, then get more.
Tom Lake

Kevin John Panzke scribbled:

512 MB's of RAM Required, 1 Giga Byte of RAM Recomended, just FYI.
512 MB's of RAM Required, 1 Giga Byte of RAM Recomended, just FYI.
512 MB's of RAM Required, 1 Giga Byte of RAM Recomended, just FYI.
512 MB's of RAM Required, 1 Giga Byte of RAM Recomended, just FYI.

"Kevin John Panzke" wrote:

512 MB's of RAM is Required for OS Installation

This is not true.

"Kevin John Panzke" wrote:

Andre, I ran the Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor (on a 32-Bit Computer) and it says the Following: 512 MB's of RAM Required, 1 GB of RAM Recomended, just FYI.

This is not true.

"Peter" wrote in message

Which brings to mind some Bill Gates quotes:
"640k should be enough for everyone"
"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1000 MPG"
GM Retort - "But that would mean your car would crash every five minutes" :)

Peter wrote:

Which brings to mind some Bill Gates quotes:
"640k should be enough for everyone"
"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1000 MPG"

But we would also have to by the locks to secure our cars separately, as they would be easy to break into due to design flaws.
--

Franz wrote:

"Kevin John Panzke" wrote:
512 MB's of RAM is Required for OS Installation
This is not true.

You asked the question, yet when someone gives a response, you respond with "This is not true.". Twice.
If you know this is not correct, then why did you list it as one of your options in your original post?
--

"Murdoc" wrote in message Peter wrote:

Which brings to mind some Bill Gates quotes:
"640k should be enough for everyone"
"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1000 MPG"

But we would also have to by the locks to secure our cars separately, as they would be easy to break into due to design flaws.
-- And don't forget GM's response to Bill Gates.
1.. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day. 2.. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car. 3.. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it , and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this. 4.. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine. 5.. Only one person at a time could use the car unless you bought "CarNT," but then you would have to buy more seats. 6.. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads. 7.. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning light would all be replaced by a single "General Protection Fault" warning light. 8.. New seats would force everyone to have the same sized butt. 9.. The airbag system would ask "are you sure" before deploying. 10.. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna. 11.. GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of Rand McNally road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though they neither need nor want them. Attempting to delete this option would immediately cause the car's performance to diminish by 50% or more. 12.. Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car. 13.. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off.