[adrian2055]

Hi Guys


I just got a newer pc and I want to run vista. I was wondering what's the best configuration for me to use with these settings:


Intel Pentium 4 HT 2.8 Ghz Processor (Single Core)
2 Ghz DDR RAM (Can Go Up To 4GB)
Western Digital 160 GB Hard Drive
Lite-On DH20A4P 16X DVD-RW Drive
Intel® 82865G Graphics Controller
SoundMAX Integrated Digital Audio


Now naturally I will upgrade my video card in the future to one that will run aero, but for now I want to use what I have to run vista. What version of vista do you recommend and should I vlite it or not? I ran the upgrade advisor and it told me business, but it's also told me business on my last 2 desktops and my old laptop, so I really don't know if It's right. Also I don't know if I need to run vlite or not and I really don't know what to disable or remove. If I need to can someone give me somd tips as to what I need to remove ort disable to make vista go faster or is it best to just install vista without using vlite?


Thanks In Advance

This post has been edited by adrian2055: 25 October 2008 - 07:44 AM

[spacesurfer]

so have you purchased vista yet or not? if you're looking for long-term, i would probably go with ultimate or home premium because of Aero.

is this a new pc or a pc that you acquired that is newer than one you have, cause you will get better performance out of a dual core processor than a P4. regardless, ultimate will run okay on a P4.

you might consider vLite for a Pentium to remove many unnecessary components that will make your install size smaller. you can remove manual install files, language files, unnecessary drivers (video, printer, modems, scanners, etc if you have your own). you can remove any services that you know for sure you won't use (like I remove defender because I use comodo firewall and avast antivirus). i remove the sidebar - i don't care for it. you get the idea. you just have to play with vlite. it will tell you certain dependencies so you don't remove something you think you'll need.

[adrian2055]

Thanks for the reply. I was given the anytime upgrade dvd by a friend. I plan on purchasing my license through microsoft's website, but I want to make sure that I buy the right one. I already got a home basic license from microsoft, but I really want to use home premium since basic has nothing to offer. I never even considered using ultimate. That's something I'll have to think about.

This is a newer pc than the one I had. My old laptop was a P4 1.6GHz with 512 mb ram (couldn't go any higher), cd-rom and a 30gb hard drive. So this one is considered a major upgrade for me.

I'll play with vlite and see what I can come up with. Ome more thing, Is is best to disable readyboost, superfetch and indexing or should I leave them enabled?

This post has been edited by adrian2055: 25 October 2008 - 12:33 PM

[spacesurfer]

in my opinion, if you have sufficient ram (> 2 gb and probably 4 gb), then you don't need readyboost. I don't know much about superfetch.

as for indexing, again, depends if that feature is important to you. i thought indexing was nice at first, but now i don't care for it as i keep my files organized in the first place.

you probably shouldn't remove them with vLite - just disable them or not use them. i'm not sure how to disable superfetch but for indexing, go to programs and features and click on turn off or on windows features on the left.

[adrian2055]

thanks. I won't delete them. I can just disable them after I install vista. Thanks for all your help.

[weEvil]

You need a videocard in order to run Aero. Your integrated won't cut it. Better stick to Aero Basic at most.
More ram is better. 4GB is ideal for Vista.

[adrian2055]

I'm gonna get a better video card and more memory in a few days. My PC can hold up to 4GB of ram, but since it's a 32-bit pc will it actually show 4GB or will I only be able to use 3GB?

[cluberti]

Depends on the BIOS, video card, etc. Most x86 systems will show between 3 and 3.5GB, depending on BIOS reservations and the amount of RAM on the videocard.

[weEvil]

adrian2055, on Oct 27 2008, 03:15 PM, said:

I'm gonna get a better video card and more memory in a few days. My PC can hold up to 4GB of ram, but since it's a 32-bit pc will it actually show 4GB or will I only be able to use 3GB?

Install 64-bit. You will be able to use the full 4GB. Its more stable and has compatibility with 32-bit apps.

This post has been edited by brucevangeorge: 06 November 2008 - 09:52 AM

[mongo66]

adrian2055, on Oct 25 2008, 06:24 PM, said:

Is is best to disable readyboost, superfetch and indexing or should I leave them enabled?

Don't disable ReadyBoost. As for Superfetch, if you have lots of RAM (> 2gb) turning it off may prove to be beneficial, although I can't say for certain since I'm running Vista with 1gb RAM. Leaving it on will result in faster application launch times since your most commonly used apps are preloaded into RAM.

Quote

The longer you use Vista, the more beneficial Superfetch will become as it actually "learns" to adapt to your computer usage habits...

I don't know how much truth there is to it, but I've been running Vista for awhile now, SuperFetch has been good to me (so far).

brucevangeorge, on Nov 6 2008, 03:51 PM, said:

adrian2055, on Oct 27 2008, 03:15 PM, said:

I'm gonna get a better video card and more memory in a few days. My PC can hold up to 4GB of ram, but since it's a 32-bit pc will it actually show 4GB or will I only be able to use 3GB?

Install 64-bit. You will be able to use the full 4GB. Its more stable and has compatibility with 32-bit apps.

Sorry brucevangeorge, I just had to comment

You know, I see this a lot... "Vista x64 is more stable than Vista x86..." How is that so? I've yet to see concrete proof of this. Both have the same codebase; only difference being one is 32bit while the other, 64bit. The only notable benefits of Vista x64 I can think of are:

(1) Supports up to 128gb RAM
(2) Better performance***
(3) Digitally Signed drivers
(4) PatchGuard (does it really work?)

*** To experience overall performance gains, applications would need to be optimized for 64bit.

While Vista x64 may outperform Vista x86, I wouldn't claim it's more stable or better to use. Generally speaking, using "digitally signed" device drivers may allow for more stability, but then again, the WHQL stamp is trivial at best imo... Just because it's digitally signed, doesn't necessarily mean it's good.

There are of course plenty of benefits to running Vista x64. If you're fortunate enough to own a 64bit system, more power to ya!

Just my worthless 2¢ ... Thank you for reading.

[weEvil]

mongo66, on Nov 6 2008, 02:11 PM, said:

Sorry brucevangeorge, I just had to comment

You know, I see this a lot... "Vista x64 is more stable than Vista x86..." How is that so? I've yet to see concrete proof of this. Both have the same codebase; only difference being one is 32bit while the other, 64bit.

MS did more work on it. Especially with Kernel security.

[Tripredacus]

I believe that there hasn't been sufficient time or usage of Vista 64bit to determine whether or not its truly more stable than 32bit. We do, however, know that x64 is more stable than x86 in prior versions of Windows, like XP, 2000, 2003, etc. I still believe that Vista x64 adoption isn't as high as it should be, since all further Windows releases will be 64bit. You'd figure that besides merely offering 64bit for each type, that only certain versions (like Business for example) would be 64bit only, in an attempt to get companies and developers to start adopting it. It is going to be a major problem when 64 suddenly becomes the only option, and I don't think the period of time offered by the Downgrade Rights program is long enough for a reliable development cycle.

Sorry to derail.

[weEvil]

Tripredacus, on Nov 7 2008, 01:06 PM, said:

I still believe that Vista x64 adoption isn't as high as it should be, since all further Windows releases will be 64bit.

Windows 7 is 32bit as well as 64bit.

[cluberti]

And Exchange 2007 had an x86 version until release. We won't know for sure if Win7 will release in both flavors until release (or until Microsoft says it will release a 32bit version).

[whs37]

64bit is more stable than 32 bit because of the drivers. Only the 64bit drivers are digitally signed, thus they undergo an additional check. It is said that about 45% of the Vista problems originate from the drivers. Much more so in 32bit than in 64bit. You should, however, make sure, that all 64bit drivers that you need for your system are actually available. That is not for certain.
As far as the Vista flavor is concerned I would opt for Home Premium. Ultimate is more expensive and unless you need the additional functions like bitlocker or disk ghosting, it is not worth it - and disk ghosting you can get for free with Macrium. Also consider that Windows7 comes out next year and then you may have to reinvest anyhow.

[Tripredacus]

cluberti, on Nov 7 2008, 10:47 PM, said:

And Exchange 2007 had an x86 version until release. We won't know for sure if Win7 will release in both flavors until release (or until Microsoft says it will release a 32bit version).

Our MS rep said all future OS will be 64bit only. But they are just spokesmen really, MS might change their mind and not even tell those guys until it comes out.

[weEvil]

Tripredacus, on Nov 10 2008, 02:32 PM, said:

cluberti, on Nov 7 2008, 10:47 PM, said:

And Exchange 2007 had an x86 version until release. We won't know for sure if Win7 will release in both flavors until release (or until Microsoft says it will release a 32bit version).

Our MS rep said all future OS will be 64bit only. But they are just spokesmen really, MS might change their mind and not even tell those guys until it comes out.

That is the case, but Windows 7 isn't really a new OS. Its a really well polished Vista at best, and its supposed to replace it.

I'm basing this on the 32bit & 64bit Betas previewed at PDC2008.

[cluberti]

Correct, I think the plan was x64 7 and nothing else. We'll have to wait and see what the RCs and release look like. I guess if there's enough demand (complaining) about an x86 version, it'll exist.

[mongo66]

whs37, on Nov 8 2008, 06:13 AM, said:

It is said that about 45% of the Vista problems originate from the drivers. Much more so in 32bit than in 64bit.

Can't disagree with that, but...

whs37, on Nov 8 2008, 06:13 AM, said:

64bit is more stable than 32 bit because of the drivers. Only the 64bit drivers are digitally signed, thus they undergo an additional check.

Perhaps, but like I said: Digitally signed drivers may allow for more stability, but then again, the WHQL stamp is trivial at best. Just because it's digitally signed, doesn't necessarily mean it's good.

Tripredacus, on Nov 10 2008, 08:32 PM, said:

cluberti, on Nov 7 2008, 10:47 PM, said:

And Exchange 2007 had an x86 version until release. We won't know for sure if Win7 will release in both flavors until release (or until Microsoft says it will release a 32bit version).

Our MS rep said all future OS will be 64bit only. But they are just spokesmen really, MS might change their mind and not even tell those guys until it comes out.

64bit adoption is growing, but not to an extent where it will become dominant within Windows 7 scheduled release timeframe. For this reason, I believe there will be a 32bit version of Windows 7, albeit the last 32bit version of Windows we will see.

[cluberti]

mongo66, on Nov 10 2008, 04:41 PM, said:

64bit adoption is growing, but not to an extent where it will become dominant within Windows 7 scheduled release timeframe. For this reason, I believe there will be a 32bit version of Windows 7, albeit the last 32bit version of Windows we will see.

We shall see - Server 2008 R2 (i.e. the "Server" branch of Win7) is slated x64 only, so again, we shall see.