Next Generation Emulation banner
1 - 20 of 46 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
5,715 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
NO.......i am not gonna try that on my system..........:p and i have my brain in place too

i was thinking cant we insanely strip down vista of its extra services and patch up some memory leaks to make it run under 256 mb ram........[considering xp can run on 64mb ram.......with only 12 processes in the task bar .......and some registry tweaks....]can something of this sort can be done to vista??

noobs dont go on bashing i saw vista at my frds place and it sucks wagon......this is meant for an intellectual discussion to see wether its possible or not
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,106 Posts
i would guess so, im running on 512 at the moment and fast, but using vlite and other things, you could possibly get it to run on 256, not be fast, but run.

and what procceser would you use 'hypotheticaly' to acomplish this

if anyone manages this, id like to know how they did it.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,715 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
i just wanted to know out of curiosity the lowest hardware that can run vista...just run.....

theoretically i think a athlon 3500 and above range would be applicable<equivalent to p4 higher versions and pD's>
 

· Final Fantasy XXX
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
That's the dumbest thing to do. Firefox alone can easily eat up 200MB of memory with multiple sites are opened.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
598 Posts
Haha I installed Vista Ultimate on old WEBBOY laptop with shared 248 MB RAM.I enabled most of the effects and of course it was working like crap.:lol:I was damn lucky when I was able to watch the video xD:lol:
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
18,905 Posts
Is it possible to run vista under 256mb ram
Ram amount is critical. With hdd trashing, regular use could be very slow (not just a little, however you try slimmin it down)

i was thinking cant we insanely strip down vista of its extra services and patch up some memory leaks to make it run under 256 mb ram
can something of this sort can be done to vista??
slimming down and disabling all sorts of features can be done. it will however make the system a shadow of its former self (where beautifying XP to emulate Vista's feel would be more advisable).
 

· Registered
Joined
·
598 Posts
What's the point of losing time by installing Vista on 256 MB of RAM anyway? Vista is a replacement for Millennium lol:D Besides...Windows 7 rocks and works MUCH better then Vista and EVEN XP.And it's STILL beta.

Btw...anyone here ever installed Windows 95 on the new computer?:rolleyes:
 

· Opensource-spice
Joined
·
1,704 Posts
^

Aren't people using Vista just for all the bling bling?
I use it because it's there; and because I half-care what OS I use as long as it works under my hardware's configuration; runs all current games and videos. Vista does, so does XP; I don't care which I use as long as it works and I've only BSOD'd twice in two years so XP isn't exactly in my view for next OS potential.
 

· ヒット激しく速く
Joined
·
26,508 Posts
You can install it but it will run horrifying i did it on a P3 1 Ghz with 256 SDR, the processor & RAM were always 100%(hell i think it was 200%) used, i dont even have to say about the HDD activity which never stoped (and yes it was stripped/raped with vlite).
 

· I m meow desu! ^_^
Joined
·
5,632 Posts
256 on vista expect white screen of doom
 

· Registered Anime Hater
Joined
·
15,801 Posts
That's the dumbest thing to do. Firefox alone can easily eat up 200MB of memory with multiple sites are opened.
Actually a couple of days back I had 6-8 Scribd books running simultaneously and RAM usage was a whopping 880MB!

Stop the flaming until you try it with Vlite. I've never tried it myself, but I would guess: YES, if you remove nearly everything, or turn nearly everything off.
What's the point? Like skore said, most people just use Vista for all the eye-candy and Aero Glass. If you're gonna strip it down of all its features then you might as well get a standard copy of XP and save yourself the trouble of running vlite and making it lighter.
 

· Windows 8 Pro
Joined
·
1,150 Posts
considering xp can run on 64mb ram.......with only 12 processes in the task bar .......and some registry tweaks....]
"Because an OS made in 2001 can do it, an OS made in late 2006 should be able to do it."

If you consider the five years between XP and Vista, and go back five years from 2001, you end up in 1996. Could a computer from 1996 comfortably run XP?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,106 Posts
maybe theres a chance on the 32 bit version but no chance on the 64 bit version it will take hours before it even shows the desktop
but if it takes hours to load then loads, then the concept, will be proven.
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top