Windows Vista Beta 2 now freely available but be warned

IT Wire ^ | June 8, 2006 | Stan Beer

[MadIvan]

Microsoft has opened up its new work in progress operating system Windows Vista Beta 2 for public scrutiny. However, be warned. You'll need pretty highly configured hardware to run it and a very fast internet connection to download the 3.5GB 32-bit or 4.4GB 64-bit version, unless you want to order and wait for the DVD kit which costs US$6.

In its product blurb, Microsoft has been very careful to stress that users will need the appropriate hardware to run Vista. The blurb distinguishes between a Vista Capable PC and Vista Premium PC.

From the sound of things, a Vista Capable PC won't do the trick for any users at all. It's just the old minimum requirement that allows you to load the product without being able to run it with any measure of acceptable performance or functionality. In fact, one of the snazzy new features, the Windows Aero interface, that has all the nice things available in Mac OSX, such as translucent windows and animations, will not be available at all. Therefore, the Vista capable PC requirements listed as: a modern processor (at least 800MHz); 512 MB of system memory; and a graphics processor that is DirectX 9 capable, are basically meaningless. No one with any sense would try to load Vista onto such a basic system.

For an acceptable installation, Microsoft provides a second list of specifications which designate what is termed a Vista Premium ready PC. The configuration given is more like what is required to actually load a fully working version of Vista. However, one gets the feeling that if you stuck with the following minimum requirement specs you would have a system that runs like an ageing dog:

• 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor.
• 1 GB of system memory.
• A graphics processor that runs Windows Aero.
• 128 MB of graphics memory.
• 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
• DVD-ROM Drive.
• Audio output capability.
• Internet access capability.

Based on what Microsoft developers have said to date, Vista is memory hungry so, at a guess, a 2GB system is probably the real minimum and who only has a 1GHz processor these days? In addition, Vista is supposed to take care of all its fancy graphics on the graphics card, leaving the system RAM free for running applications. Therefore instead of 128MB get 256MB of graphics memory. In short, double all the Microsoft minimum requirements to get the real minimum requirements.

Having said all of the above, unless you're a developer or an insatiably curious journalist, it's probably not a good idea to install Vista Beta 2 at all on any machine that is doing useful work. Anything as unstable as the Beta 2 version of a totally new Windows product could easily cause havoc.

Microsoft is encouraging users who need to buy a new PC prior to the release of Vista with labels that say Vista Capable or Vista Premium. Anyone who buys anything less than a Vista Premium configuration is probably not serious about running Vista and may as well stick with XP. The bad news for those who do intend to upgrade to Vista is that it's going to cost you big time. Exactly how much is still a secret. Steve Ballmer is reported to have said that you'll pay about the same for Vista as XP if you want to do the same things. Now that's clever. Ballmer knows very well that people who upgrade Vista will want to do a whole lot more. Taking an intuitive stab in the dark, US$300 to US$400 comes to mind.

[Still Thinking]

I think what would amaze and irritate them is that the bulk of the code and processor time is dedicated to the UI, and not whatever task the program is supposed to perform (excepting programs where the UI IS the function, like media players).

[antiRepublicrat]

I recently got a new Dell Dimension 1100 series box through a corporate purchasing agent.

That's one thing that really gets me about the Mac/PC comparisons. People say "I can get this Dell for $600, and it's specced-out better than the Mac." Yeah, but the Dell is a real piece of junk with crap video and no ability to upgrade. Yes, a mini and iMac also have built-in video, but at least it's decent video (even the Intel GPU on the mini is able to run the GPU-accelerated eye candy of OS X).