Experiment: Installing Windows 10 On a 7-Year-Old Acer Aspire One 405
jones_supa writes: Windows 10 will launch in less than a week and it is supposed to work flawlessly on devices already powered by Windows 7 and Windows 8.1, as Microsoft struggled to keep system requirements unchanged to make sure that everything runs smoothly. Device drivers all the way back to Windows Vista platform (WDDM 1.0) are supported. Softpedia performed a practical test to see how Windows 10 can run on a 7-year-old Acer Aspire One netbook powered by Intel Atom N450 processor clocked at 1.66 GHz, 1 GB of RAM, and a 320 GB mechanical hard disk. The result is surprising to say the least, as installation not only went impressively fast, but the operating system itself also works fast.
I find it intersting this article exist: (Score:5, Interesting)
I have about the same netbook, and I've never used the Windows 7 that came with it, but want to put it back specifically so I can put Windows 10 on it to play with it. I lost the Clonezilla image I made of it years ago and am on the verge of ordering the backup media from the Acer website - I've come up empty on a WIndows 7 Starter ISO. I've loved my little Acer, I've had three bike wrecks with it, one of which my entire body weight went up and down the thing twice as I rolled over my backpack, not a scratch. I double the RAM from 1 to 2 GB the day I bought it and put an SSD in later. The SSD was incredible when it came to increasing the battery life and performance. I've told people it's the laptop Fischer-Price made, and I say it in a bragging manner, I still love my little netbook.
Re: (Score:3)
I have about the same netbook, and I've never used the Windows 7 that came with it, but want to put it back specifically so I can put Windows 10 on it to play with it.
These netbooks are so old they actually originally came with XP; I have an Acer Aspire D250 right here, and I use it regularly. I would upgrade it, but the screen is so pathetic there's no point. Anything which needs more RAM needs more screen resolution, too.
Re: (Score:2)
I think mine is a little newer than the one in the article, mine is a D255E-1853. I liked mine so much that when a year or so later I bought my daughter a bit newer model, both of ours came with Windows 7 Starter, but both have been running Linux for quite a while. Mine still has Kubuntu despite the fact I quit installing that in favor of Netrunner a couple of years ago and hers has Elementary OS on it.
Re:I find it intersting this article exist: (Score:4, Interesting)
I bought my first-generation Acer Aspire One in 2008, back when the "netbook" segment was still new. It even became my main computer for some months, and was quite happy with it — Except, of course, for the 9" 1024x600 screen.
Two years ago, I upgraded to a Acer Aspire One 756. Better processor and more memory allow me to virtualize whenever I need to do some Windows stuff (twice a year or so). That and a 10.5" 1366x768 screen, with mostly the same weight became godsend.
Having a computer that allows me to upgrade once every five years, and that can be bought at US$300 at the supermarket... That's what I call convenience.
Re:I find it intersting this article exist: (Score:5, Interesting)
I was upset when Microsoft decided they didn't want Netbooks to exist anymore and used their clout to force the reputable companies out of making them. I laughed my butt off when they came back in the name of Chromebooks - the first Acer Chromebooks as far as I could tell were basically a repurposed Aspire One anyways. These are actually seeing some real adoption, schools in particular in this area require kids to have a Chromebook, that they will issue, or something that will do the same things as a Chromebook if a parent will provide (my buddy sent his daughter with a first gen Surface tablet with Chrome).
I see the entire Chromebook phenomenon as a fuck you to Microsoft for the bullying they pulled forcing manufacturers out of that market anyways. The fact ChromeOS is Linux they pushed them right back where I thought they should be (mostly) anyways.
On that note - Chrome does horrible full-screen, which is almost a requirement on a netbook. I went back to Firefox over it on my netbook, and went back to it everywhere as a result. Glad I did, I'm not happy with the current state of Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome does horrible full-screen
They really need to adopt something more like their mobile UI for full-screen mode. Scrolling up shows the browser navigation / url bar and scrolling down scrolls it off-screen.
Re:I find it intersting this article exist: (Score:4, Informative)
I have that Acer Aspire One with the same system specs as well. It's running Windows 7 fairly well, but even doing something simple like watching a Youtube or CNN video on it will bring the entire system to it's knees. It just doesn't have either the memory or the processing power to decode video with a decent framerate.
I guess that it would be fine if you used it for word processing with an old version of Word, but it simply cannot handle a modern web browser.
Re: (Score:2)
"I guess that it would be fine if you used it for word processing with an old version of Word, but it simply cannot handle a modern web browser."
your guess fails. here is a 'modern' browser that will run on this old hardware without bringing it to it's knees.
http://lynx.browser.org/ [browser.org]
Re: (Score:2)
That browser is in no way modern.
That's something you can run on a VMS terminal, a relic so old that it probably predates you.
Re: (Score:2)
With (upgraded) 2GB of RAM and Linux/KDE using the Netbook desktop and an SSD for what it's worth mine does Youtube just fine, since it's WebM, I don't go to CNN but it manages with other Flash based video that needs to die. The fact is as far as Windows is concerned I hit the power button when I bought it to make sure it could boot, upgraded the RAM, did it again, then I plowed it and put Linux on it so I've never really seen how well it works with Windows. The fact that Windows 7 Starter qualifies for t
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
"Windows 10 will launch in less than a week" (Score:5, Funny)
That's some boot time!
First few words in the summary? (Score:5, Funny)
"Windows 10 will launch in less than a week"
If it won't launch in less than a day, I would say scrap the whole idea.
Not Surprising (Score:2)
My experience with IBM T60 (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Pre-production versions of anything are notoriously clunky because they often still have test/debug code. You can't gauge their speed as an indication of anything.
Since I actually have one of those (Score:2)
Now to see if it will run on a Palm Pilot (Score:3)
Yeah, check back in a few days (Score:5, Interesting)
I have it on a Compaq C306US with 1 GB of RAM and a 1.73 GHz Celeron. It seemed impressive at first, but the daily Defender signature update brings the machine to its knees. Seriously, the mouse pointer will not even move, and when I was actually able to bring up Perfmon, CPU and disk were both at 100%. That's unusable. I guess the answer is to install another security package, but that's a serious WTF. In 2015, it would be nice if Microsoft had heard of I/O throttling.
The audio also doesn't work unless you disable it, then re-enable it in device manager. I reported this bug with every previous build to no avail.
I wouldn't complain, but Microsoft claimed that every Vista-capable PC could run Windows 10, and that appears to be false.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 10 also works fast as long as .... (Score:4, Interesting)
My wife's very same netbook runs GIMP, LibreOffice, Firefox and video player concurrently and well under SuSE 13.1
Oh, and under Win7 it takes ages to boot (you do have an antivirus, right?), so I will take the story with a grain of salt or two.
Works great on my 7-year-old Dell (Core 2 Quad) (Score:2)
Granted, it is a little beefier specs-wise, but I have the Win 10 Pro 64-bit Preview installed on a Dell Inspiron 530 from mid-'07 and it is running great. It is a Core 2 Quad 6600 (2.4 GHz), has 6 GB DDR2 RAM, a 120 GB Crucial SSD (hacked BIOS re-enables AHCI that Dell removed), 1 TB WD Blue HDD and a 1 GB Radeon 6450.
It works fine, plays 1080p video with no issues but is loud and puts out a lot of heat (105 watt processor). I am looking forward to replacing it with an Intel NUC later this year when the S
struggled to? (Score:2, Insightful)
Wouldn't it imply that it tried hard and (at least partially) failed?
"Microsoft struggled to keep system requirements unchanged to make sure that everything runs smoothly"
vs
"Microsoft fought hard to keep system requirements unchanged to make sure that everything runs smoothly"
A return to performance? (Score:4, Informative)
Is it just me that feels that this isn't a win for Windows 10, but actually a degradation of Windows Vista/7 and - to some extent - 8 in terms of performance losses at those points?
I know that XP -> Vista and XP->7 felt like backward steps at times in terms of performance, and were accompanied by a similar ramp-up in terms of realistic minimum specs. It just seems that in 8 (which is as fast as 7, if not faster, as far as I can tell) and 10 are actually coming back to what they should always have been?
Just junk like Superfetch services and Windows Search - I feel if you were to optimise those more efficiently that they'd easily show a performance improvement. I know that disabling them certainly does (fun fact: Disabling Windows Search on Windows 8 stops you installing new keyboard languages!).
Windows 8 has been my last two mass deployments and, with a few third-party-cured interface problems, is just as good to the users as 7 was, but actually boots, resumes, etc. much faster. And the amount of sheer built-in hardware drivers is phenomenal. I no longer need several images to image dozens of types and models of computer, laptop, all-in-one, etc. just one image will do with maybe a tweak if something requires the very latest graphics drivers.
Windows 10 appears to be continuing this trend of a RETURN to performance, rather than performing miracles. Hardware hasn't got much faster since the Windows 7 days - maybe a core or two more, maybe a graphics card upgrade, but the base CPU/RAM/disk are pretty much in the same area.
I mean, it's good either way. But it shouldn't be shocking. Optimised versions of 7 were sold with netbooks for years, and their hardware was severely limited for a long time. It was just a matter of turning junk off.
My min spec of "Dual or-more-core anything with 4Gb RAM" has held for several years in a row now for business systems, and can be satisfied for a virtual pittance. Only very recently have I contemplated enhancing that to 8Gb of RAM and maybe an SSD as a luxury, but the rest is pretty static.
Re:A return to performance? (Score:5, Interesting)
Do note that XP only needed 64 MB of RAM (128 MB recommended). The last XP system I supported was a couple years back, but the requirement had bloated to about 128 MB (256 MB recommended) because anti-virus software had gotten so much bigger (usually takes 30-50 MB of RAM).
For decades, software companies hadn't controlled bloat. They counted on performance gains in hardware to compensate for how much slower their software was getting due to bloat. This began to change after Prescott (around 2004), when the clock speed wars came to a screeching halt due to heat generated by power leakage at those higher frequencies, and for a time Intel lost the fastest CPU title crown to AMD. Intel and AMD began placing a greater emphasis on power efficiency rather than pure performance, and as a result the bloat in software began to outstrip increase in hardware speeds.
That's a large part of the reason Vista (2007) was such a dog. It was coded assuming the performance level of generally available hardware would be higher than it actually turned out to be. Consequently it felt like it ran a lot slower than XP (compared to when XP was new), and most users opted to stick with XP. Around 2010 we hit the point where all but the discount CPUs were "fast enough" for most people's needs, and advancements in CPU design since then have been directed mostly at reducing power consumption (a Core 2 Duo system at idle burns about 75 Watts, a Broadwell system burns about 20-30 Watts idle).
Software companies have had to come to grips with this performance stagnation, and are finally beginning to get bloat under control. Since they can no longer count on their newer software "feeling" faster because of hardware upgrades, they're forced to go through and optimize their software to make it actually run faster. Which is resulting in this curious inversion, where newer software actually runs better old systems than the previous versions of that software.
The industry is in for a major shake-up because of this in the next decade (arguably it's already been experiencing it the past 5 years). As the need to upgrade your computer every 2-3 years decreases, computers will be used for longer times. That means on an annual basis, hardware companies will have reduced sales (if people go from replacing their computer every 3 years to every 6 years, that means half the annual sales even though the same number of people are still using computers). And software companies will be expected to support their products for longer.
Mobile (phones) is the one area this hasn't really taken hold because the sector has been developing so quickly you feel obligated to upgrade your smartphone every 1-2 years. But eventually it too will plateau. Long-term, we're probably looking at computers having to last 7-10 years before being replaced. Which interestingly enough is about the timescale for console systems (6-7 years between refreshes).
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:5, Funny)
You forgot to spell Microsoft with a '$' and call it a slashvertisement to get your automagic +5, you silly goose.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Still hate the new interface. I will never warm up to the big, ugly colored squares. You know, the ones that they needed to make it work on a tiny phone screen? I will wait to read about useful improvements in the OS before I do anything. Right now I see nothing I want.
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm just curious, why are live tiles so horrible? I see this reaction often but I never really get a good explanation why, though I've heard many reasons why they are good. They are like icons, except resizable and enhanced with live information. They are rectangular/square, just like the taskbar icons in Windows 7 that everyone I know loves.
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:5, Informative)
They are rectangular/square, just like the taskbar icons in Windows 7 that everyone I know loves.
Take a closer look.
The taskbar icons in Windows 7 have glass effect, nice diagonal gradient and rounded corners. Try hovering the mouse cursor over icons of running applications: there is even a sleek little lamp effect which follows the cursor, and the color of that effect matches the application icon. Also the icon of the active application has brighter background than others.
These kind of small touches are missing in the Windows 10 UI.
Re: (Score:3)
I though on Slashdot we hated Eye Candy?
The Glass effect blurs too much, so you are unable to see what is behind it.
The Lamp effect is marginally useful so you can pick your icons where you mouse cursor is jammed at the bottom of the screen.
Re: (Score:2)
Those nice interface special effects also demand too much of the crappy little Lower Slobbovian PCs that so many people try to shoehorn Windows into. To get their treasured student copy of Word 2007 to come up before Tuesday, they have to rummage through Control Panel for ways of turning the special effects off.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I though on Slashdot we hated Eye Candy?
No, we just hate anything new and/or from Microsoft.
Re: (Score:3)
Most of those effects are for highlighting open tasks (which is why they call it the task bar). No version of the Start menu has ever used such glassy highlight effects for open tasks.
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:4, Insightful)
The desktop exists in all its glory in Windows 10. It will still do everything you mentioned. Tiles are not part of the desktop.
The Start menu, however, has tiles. And they can be resized; you can make them smaller than desktop icons if you want. And they can be removed completely if that's not your thing.
Re: Xbox 360 Metro (Score:3)
Viewing distance.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
> Try hovering the mouse cursor over icons of running applications: there is even a sleek little lamp effect which follows the cursor
These incredibly shallow, self-serving afterthoughts, which don't show coherency with anything else, make me disappointed. It's not even that the 'sleek' little lamp effect looks bad (which it does) or that it's useless (which it is).
The little lamp effect is not diegetic, that's the problem. It is the shallowest possible thing to do on a UI. It is an after-effect, implemen
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
It's not "more modern looking", it's simply a modern designer trend. There's a really big difference.
Re: (Score:2)
They're also ugly as hell having absolutely horrible color schemes that make me want to rip my eyes out every time I see them. Neon Orange on Smoke Gray transparency? WTH?? Also, there's no dimensionality. It's all flat. The quick bar isn't so bad and I can get used to it...but those damn tiles all over the place in the start menu itself? Ugly as damn sin.
I grant that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but what I behold in Win10 is ugly as shit to me. If you like it, fine. I'm happy for you. Enjo
Re: (Score:2)
Neon Orange on Smoke Gray transparency? WTH??
I can't say I've come across this. The "smoke gray transparency" sounds like the background color and can be changed in settings.
You can get rid of tiles if you want. You can even shrink the menu down to remove the extra space they once took up.
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:5, Insightful)
In my IT business, there is an effect I see all the time. Any change to a familiar interface, even a clear improvement, brings forth a certain cohort of users who insist that their favorite product has been ruined forever.
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:5, Insightful)
"But you can change all the options..." if you can find them. Changing the finer points of the visuals such as Icon Spacing and Title Bar font used to be behind Desktop / Properties / Appearance. Now it's Desktop / Personalize / Window Color. That's...less intuitive.
Every new version of Windows since 2000->XP has suffered from the unnecessary moving of options and screens. They've all been focused on the dwindling number of people who have never used a computer at the expense of the other 99%. Maybe the new layout makes more logical sense if you have no muscle memory or expectations. Then as soon as everybody gets used to the new layout, they go and fuck it all up again.
Re: (Score:3)
Personal opinion, the stock Metro Tiles that are there the first time you fire up your computer or Surface tablet are just too much, literally there are just too many of them there. I like the concept of the live tiles, and actually find them useful, but having to scroll through 10 horizontal pages of apps to find what you want is incredibly off-putting. After spending a significant amount of time paring them down to only the ones I find useful, it's actually a usable launch pad.
The "Apps" View, their a
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like you are using Windows 8 or 8.1. Windows 10 has a different interface, you don't need to "scroll over a screen".
The menu structure for applications has not changed. Word 2013 is in the same folder that it would have been in for Windows 7.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that tiles wouldn't be bad, and the emphasis on typography doesn't have to be bad either.
But the execution, as with pretty much anything Microsoft, is botched. All the colors are overly bright and flashy, and when everything competes for your attention through dense, opaque colors, and large, fairly uniform tile sizes, then your attention isn't properly directed. Also, with the emphasis on bold background colors and typography, the rest of the presentation, i.e. icons, pictorials, graphs, take a bac
Re: (Score:2)
So put ClassicShell on it and you won't ever have to see that shit again....
Re: (Score:2)
Just don't want or need it. I don't run apps, I only use programs for the work I do (Creative Suite 5.5, ChemBioDraw, Sigmaplot 12, Reference Manager, etc.). Also play games. Windows 7 Ultimate does everything I want, and so far I haven't seen anything in Windows 10 that would make me switch. That may change over time as they work on 10, but after Windows 8 it's going to be a tough sell.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft never achieved some sort of nirvanic perfection with Windows XP or Windows 7. The start menu was a refinement process that began in 1995, but just because it's old and familiar doesn't mean it ever became all that great. The only way to move forward is to try new things - even awful things. Any company that doesn't is dying.
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:5, Insightful)
This reminds me of recent questions, can anyone build a car that can't be hacked? Well, yes, all the cars built 2 decades ago can't be hacked and contain all the features I want in a car (drives from A to B, air conditioning, heater, radio).
- Take me back to 1984. Please.
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why are you whining about something that is 100% optional?
Duh, it's Microsoft
If Windows came with a free cancer-curing app people would be complaining here that you couldn't turn it off.
Re: (Score:3)
So it sounds like VMware Player is exactly what you want. Virtual Machines live as a file on your system, not a drive, they are VIRTUAL machines running under your machine. It is like running Windows 10 in a Chrome session rather than directly on your system. There is no dual booting happening, no partitioning. It is as safe as safe can get to uninstall, you just delete the files.
The upgrade process is reversible just as any installation is reversible. You can just reinstall Windows 7 from the original
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder how much Microsoft paid to Dice in order to get this article placed here?
Probably not much, they'll do anything for a dollar.
All I know for sure, Win10 isn't touching any system I work on until the update issue is backtracked on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The update issue doesn't exist for enterprise systems. Just the consumer and SB-oriented Home and Pro versions.
So you want me to pay enterprise pricing to keep the ability to have control over my own home system? No thank you.
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:2)
You never had control of your home systems. Windows is not yours to control, and never was.
Unless you think being obsolete or vulnerable is being 'in control'.
Re: (Score:2)
The control I have is choice. A choice if or when I want to apply updates, that is more important to me. I run vulnerable/"obsolete" systems all the time and am just fine with that, in fact I'm quite happy and would like to "downgrade" some systems.
Shocking that someone doesn't want to be a sheep, I know it's hard to understand.
Re: (Score:2)
But you are a sheep. Just not Microsoft's sheep.
Re: (Score:2)
You can still uninstall any updates, and updates can be delayed by months under the Pro license.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't care. I'm not going to be forced into updating my system. You'll be able to uninstall, until there's one they don't want you to uninstall. You'll be able to delay, until there's one they don't want you to delay. This type of thing is really coming to a head for me, too many times I've spent money on something only to have it changed to something I would never have purchased. Patches should always be optional and always be up to the user when to apply.
Re: (Score:2)
So what you're saying is there's nothing that'll make you happy with Windows 10. If you want the gearhead features, you pay for the gearhead features. I, for one, am glad that after I upgrade my parents to Windows 10 they won't have the choice to ignore updates. Same with 95% of people out there with computers.
Re: (Score:2)
I advised mine not to install Win10. I don't want to get the calls "X has changed how do I do Y now?", "I was working on this critical thing and something (ie: patch) happened, how do I get it back?", "We're trying to watch Netflix like you showed us but it keeps shuddering in the middle of it (due to "background" updates screwing with the framerate on their slow system)"
The fact is the current regime works perfectly well, people like yourself can schedule the download/install to automatically occur in the
Re: (Score:2)
You'll be able to uninstall, until there's one they don't want you to uninstall. You'll be able to delay, until there's one they don't want you to delay.
It doesn't surprise me that this would turn into FUD. When you can't find a good argument, make one up.
Re:... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately, I agree with you. For technically minded people.
Unfortunately now that the vast majority of PC's are in the hands of people who are only semi-technical and will happily disable the update service, firewall and anti-virus cause their buddy Steve said it made his PC run faster. Steve also recommends plugging the network cable directly into the cable modem as that router thing just causes parity errors.
It's almost like the should sell a "Home" version for the vast majority of people, then have some sort of "Enterprise" or "Professional" version for technical people.
Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:2)
I guess MS still strongly feels this site gets so many eyeballs so it is worth relentless ads brazenly disguised as stories or Experiments... so inspire of Troll mods the site is worth defending...
Re: (Score:2)
I guess MS still strongly feels this site gets so many eyeballs so it is worth relentless ads brazenly disguised as stories or Experiments...
It reminds me of Microsoft grass-roots astroturfing campaigns of yore [usatoday.com].
Re:... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score:5, Insightful)
"I wonder how much Microsoft paid to Dice"
Had the review been unfavorable, who would you claim is the conspirator?
I'm getting really tired of argumentum ad monsantium, the logical fallacy that any position opposing mine has to be shilling for someone.
Re:Surprise? (Score:5, Insightful)
The PC have improved. But with Parallel processing. And most programs are not coded to take advantage of the multiple cores. So the speed of any one of your programs has more or less peaked. However you can run more at the same time.
Until we can come up with easier methods than threads hacks added to most languages, we will still be mostly programming for a single CPU and not parallel processing. It will also help for more colleges to have Parallel processing as part of its undergrad program. Most introduce it in Grad School.
Re: (Score:2)
It will also help for more colleges to have Parallel processing as part of its undergrad program. Most introduce it in Grad School.
Is this a recent development or was I mostly just lucky that almost 20 years ago the state school I went to (MSU Mankato) offered it as an undergrad class as an option. They also offered compiler construction as an undergrad class which I gather is another one that is fairly rare at the undergrad level.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, Amdahl's Law says that if 50% of a procedure's steps must be run in sequence and 50% can be dispatched among a pool of workers, then the speedup from having an infinitely large pool of workers is the reciprocal of 50% . . . or two times. Two time improvement for an infinite number of CPU cores.
After Gene Amdahl coined his law on parallel processing he immediately went back to work on developing CPUs with faster clock speeds, because this is a much easier problem than identifying which steps of a proces
Re:Surprise? (Score:5, Funny)
> After Gene Amdahl coined his law on parallel processing he immediately went back to work on developing CPUs with faster clock speeds, because this is a much easier problem than identifying which steps of a process can be run concurrently and which have dependencies. . .
He didn't have to choose - he could have taken a parallel approach.
Re: (Score:2)
Threading and other means of taking advantage multiple CPUs is really very old. It's only the use of them in PCs that's relatively new and even that's not terribly new.
The Aspire One might not have the hardware to take advantage of (or rather tolerate) the level of multithreading in a more recent OS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think you are talking about multithreading in your pigeon English.
Fuck sakes, he was most likely referring to threads.h [cppreference.com] , which is the std. C++ library for multithreading.
Re: (Score:2)
Making fun of word choices and then you throw out an eggcorn like pigeon [wikipedia.org]?
Re: Surprise? (Score:4, Funny)
I am sorry to be the baron of bad news, but you seem buttered, so allow me to play doubles advocate here for a moment. For all intensive purposes I think you are wrong. In an age where false morals are a diamond dozen, true virtues are a blessing in the skies, and are more than just ice king on the cake. We often put our false morality on a petal stool like a bunch of pre-Madonnas, but you all seem to be taking something very valuable for granite.
So I ask of you to mustard up all the strength you can because it is a doggy dog world out there. Although there is some merit to what you are saying it seems like you have a huge ship on your shoulder. In your argument you seem to throw everything in but the kids Nsync, and even though you are having a feel day with this I am here to bring you back into reality.
I have a sick sense when it comes to these types of things. It is almost spooky, because I cannot turn a blonde eye to these glaring flaws in your rhetoric. I have zero taller ants when it comes to people spouting out hate in the name of moral righteousness. You just need to remember what comes around is all around, and when supply and command fails you will be the first to go.
Make my words, when you get down to brass stacks it doesn't take rocket appliances to get two birds stoned at once. It's clear who makes the pants in this relationship, and sometimes you just have to swallow your prize and accept the fax, instead of making a half-harded effort. You might have to come to this conclusion through denial and error but I swear on my mother's mating name that when you put the petal to the medal you will pass with flying carpets like it's a peach of cake.
Re: (Score:3)
It isn't that older CPU couldn't support multi-threading, but the fact it was a single CPU, And threading similar tasks will not offer performance increase per coding complexity. So most programs were not multi-threaded, to do parallel processing, they were multi-threaded as to not hinder the User Interface, or to handle multiple interface requests. (Such as having many users login to the same port) .
Most Desktop applications didn't even bother going that far.
Now with multi-CPU cores, you can have each CP
Re: (Score:3)
*pidgin.
If you're going to gripe about someone's grammar, you really should ensure that yours is impeccable.
Re: (Score:2)
'Fast' is relative.
The question is whether 10 is as responsive as 7. MS specifically tuned 7 to run on low-end hardware, such as this netbook.
Re:OS X (Score:4, Interesting)
Yup, agreed - in one case Apple had ditched OSX support for the 2006 Mac Pro but Windows 8.1 ran just fine on it. Hows about that for supporting your own products!
Re:OS X (Score:5, Informative)
My Late 2009 Mac Mini is running Plex server and home theatre on 10.10.4. First quote I could find about system requirements (from a Mac World article here [macworld.co.uk] )
So, which of your three-year old machines is not on that list?
Re: (Score:3)
El Capitan has been announced to run fine on my 2007 Macbook Pro. Sorry your computer isn't powerful enough.
Re: (Score:2)
I call bullshit.
What machine, exactly?
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the list of supported Macs for the latest El Capitan Beta which goes back to some 2007 models: https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/mac/releasenotes/General/rn-osx-10.11/index.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40016209 [apple.com]
As for osx86, I'm running the latest El Capitan Beta just fine on my Main PC (2013ish hardware) and my old Dell Latitude E6420 (2011) without issues - the selected hardware is fully supported. If you want to have OS X run fine on your PC then pay attention to using hardware within
Re:OS X (Score:5, Insightful)
Now if only OS X would was allowed to work on my 3 year old system which is more than powerful enough for it based on hacked installs, and if only all the software wasn't updated so it won't work on the last OS. Thanks Apple!
Meanwhile I can install Windows 10 on a 10 year old system and play a 16 year old game just fine. Boo Microsoft for being horrible people that don't give away your amazing product for free and don't have a penguin or a fruit as a logo.
What three-year-old Mac doesn't support the latest version of OS X? OS X 10.10 "Yosemite" officially supports Macs dating as far back as 2007 (or 2008 or 2009, depending on the system), and I believe El Capitan will support the same.
Re: (Score:2)
Bentley and Rolls Royce would not use that excuse.
Re: (Score:2)
This is merely the result of Apple being primarily a hardware company and Microsoft being primarily a software company.
So? AFAIK Acer is also a Hardware company and their laptop update just fine.
If Apple want to goes on with the crapwagon that OS X is it's their decision, but it doesn't excuse them. The fact that WINE exist and installed on 90% MAC (the other 10% simply boot in Windows) is proof enough that Apple shoot themselves in the foot. If they created a "Windows ready" desktop that is modular (looking at you Mac Pro) they have the power and the money to buy hardware at super discount and wipe most competition. If the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually this is a terrible excuse, because the hardware and driver support is so limited the bar is much lower for Apple to do this.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is not a computer company. They are a designer products company.
Microsoft is a computing company.
Re: (Score:2)
OK. They're a hardware retailer/reseller. That little bit of semantics play doesn't change much.
Re:No Point without SecureBoot (Score:4, Informative)
Re:No Point without SecureBoot (Score:4, Interesting)
No "at least" about it. Windows 8 and 10 support secure boot but don't require it.
Windows 8 specifically requires that secure boot be optional in the BIOS for Windows Logo Certification. The only change for Windows 10 is that this requirement is no longer there leaving it up to the vendor to decide if they want to lock your PC down. However for Windows Logo Certification on Windows 10 there is a requirement that OEMs support SecureBoot and have it enabled out of the box.
Windows does not require it.
Windows will run even if you disable it.
Re:No Point without SecureBoot (Score:4, Interesting)
There is no UEFI SecureBoot requirement in Windows 8 or 10. At least I have been able to install to any kinds of machines just fine.
The requirement has been for the "Designed for Windows [Version]" program, if you want to ship with the sticker, be an OEM partner and get the best pricing it's compulsory but it's not an install requirement. That would be stupid of Microsoft, since most pre-2012 machines wouldn't be able to update. Also for Win8 OEMs are required to give you a way to turn it off, for Win10 they're merely permitted. I'm sure some of them will be encouraged by Microsoft to disable it completely, to see if that'll draw anti-trust lawsuits. So not yet, but I bet it's coming soon....
Re: (Score:2)
The SecureBoot requirement is for Windows Logo certification - it's not an installation requirement.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Acer Aspire One can't do ... compositing".
Um, yes it can.. It can also do 3D -- most of the Aspire Ones, anyway... The line started with the Intel 945GSE Express. Later, some used ATI Radeon 4225.
The AAO D270 has an Atom N2600 (or N2800)- with Intel GMA 3600/3650 (PowerVR SGX 545), and that one doesn't do Linux 3D.
So, for use with Linux, avoid the D270 (use a D257), and 3d and compositing will work just fine.
(owner of 5 of these, running Linux).