[Matt A. Tobin]

I want to start a project to see how far we can strip vista down to make it run comparable to xp and not loose hardware/application compatibility..

Things to strip out:

-Aero Theme (theming all together)

-Inbox Apps Such as Windows Mail Windows Sidebar Windows Photo Gallery but not breaking picture viewer, contacts, dvd maker, movie maker, etc... (Keep IE and Media Player)

-Extra Services we do not simply need for a basic computer just internet/word processor/music player/email checker

I need help and testers to test configurations... Lets see how far we can strip vista without breaking things for 3rd party apps...

If anyone can help or contribute ideas for what can be removed without consequences would be helpful too... I hope this will not be a dead thread

So lets see how far we can tear vista down...

[anonymous_user]

First check all the boxes under Compatibility > Applications. Then try this guide:

http://www.msfn.org/board/Guide-VLite-12-R...po-t121545.html

Also see this thread for some things not to remove (for some programs):

http://www.msfn.org/...ms-t114719.html

And if you want wireless:

http://www.msfn.org/board/specifical-compo...-n-t123229.html

This post has been edited by anonymous_user: 05 October 2008 - 10:05 PM

[bledd]

running vista on older hardware is pointless

[oskingen]

Yeah pointless and after he'll say vista sucks

[bledd]

no i like vista, it's great

but you get cack performance if you have under 2gb (superfetch can't spread it's wings) and less than two cores

once you hit 4gb, and 2+ cores, vista really flies



vlite is great, but vista does need decent hardware, fact!

[oskingen]

bledd, on Oct 7 2008, 04:53 AM, said:

no i like vista, it's great

but you get cack performance if you have under 2gb (superfetch can't spread it's wings) and less than two cores

once you hit 4gb, and 2+ cores, vista really flies



vlite is great, but vista does need decent hardware, fact!

Agreed, i was just talking about Matt A. Tobin

[bledd]

high five

[MagicAndre1981]

you don't need DualCore CPU for Vista. You only need a fast hdd, 2 GB RAM and a Dx9 card for Aero Glass and Vista runs smooth

[bledd]

whilst it does work on that hardware, i'd much prefer XP on that spec.

vista should've been x64 only imo

[Matt A. Tobin]

Maybe I wasnt as clear as i should have been.. my bad... and thanks to that anonymous user for the links they are helpful...

Anyway the Key Points are of this project are:

-See how far we can strip windows down...
-Remove Inbox Apps
-Remove Eyecandy where we can
-Get Vista to run on the oldest hardware effencently as possible. Just to see how far we can reduce its foot print
-Reduce Hard Drive Space upon installation

The best Analogy is it take vista to place some ware between Windows PE 2.0 and Windows Vista Stock with the Foot print of about a stock XP CD.
But with out breaking compatibility with applications that may be dependent of some core technology of windows..

Additional Things to kill
-Superfetch
-Indexing
-As many services that can be safely removed as possible

Then Create a Guide and Post it here and else ware for someone to use as a base for their own Custom Vista Installs but they can start from a base of Vista which this project will give them and if they need or want something they can add it back.

My Target Oldest Hardware would be around 512 mb of ram 1ghz Athlon or P4 and a 30gb hard drive - Now this is just a general guideline of hardware id like to see if we can get Vista stripped to a point that it would run decent on it. Now I realize that the Recommended Hardware for a base vista and more realistically would be something approaching a 1.8-2.0 ghz Celuron/Semphron 512 mb of ram and 30gb harddrive.

Reminder this is just an exparament to see just how far we can get vista's foot print down to and the absolute minimum hardware it could run decent on. And if we can reach our target then think of how well it would run on modern specs..

BTW The Aero Removal is optional I suppose just disabling it on older hardware is just as good as removing it.

Thanks again for your replys and contribution on this project.

And remember its just for fun

This post has been edited by Matt A. Tobin: 09 October 2008 - 03:57 PM

[bledd]

Matt A. Tobin, on Oct 9 2008, 09:49 PM, said:

Additional Things to kill
-Superfetch

this is a ridiculous thing to remove, this and dx10 are the best things in vista

[anonymous_user]

Well if he's trying to run on an older computer (less memory), it might be good to not run Superfetch.

[bledd]

it's pointless to use vista if your pc can't handle superfetch..

[awergh]

but i think it is more about the challenge to see what you can run vista on
just like here Vista slowest hardware experiment

[Clint]

bledd, on Oct 6 2008, 11:46 AM, said:

running vista on older hardware is pointless

bledd, on Oct 15 2008, 09:49 AM, said:

Matt A. Tobin, on Oct 9 2008, 09:49 PM, said:

Additional Things to kill
-Superfetch

this is a ridiculous thing to remove, this and dx10 are the best things in vista

bledd, on Oct 21 2008, 09:55 AM, said:

it's pointless to use vista if your pc can't handle superfetch..

Okok...so now everybody knows your standpoint. Please stop shuvving your opinion about his "experiment", it's not your call.

This post has been edited by Clint: 23 October 2008 - 10:25 PM

[MarkJohnson]

I have a brand new socket 754 Sempron 3000+ and an old Biostar motherboard and I decided to put it in my cousins worn out Dell. It currently has 512MB RAM (DDR400) and I just loaded Vista HP 32-bit on it for testing. It is really slow and I'm very interested in this project and I'd be interested in your results so far if you could post them and I could maybe help you by trying out different setups as well. I'll check out those links better and see what I can come up with.

Thanks in advance and let me know how I can help.
-=Mark=-

[weEvil]

Use Server 2K8 instead.

[awergh]

agreed server 2k8 runs well, 2k8 felt much more responsive then vista on p4 2ghz 512mb ram, but its upto you what os you use

[bledd]

Clint, on Oct 24 2008, 04:21 AM, said:

Okok...so now everybody knows your standpoint. Please stop shuvving your opinion about his "experiment", it's not your call.

fair enough