The minimum system requirements for TopDesk are:
- Windows XP.
- 800 Mhz CPU.
- 256 MB RAM.
- 16 MB DirectX 8.1 compatible video card * .
by What-A-Coincidence 21 Replies latest social current
The minimum system requirements for TopDesk are:
How to install Windows Vista:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVbf9tOGwno
For those of you who don't know, I removed Vista from my new PC and dual-booted Win2k and Ubuntu Linux. For those who want an update, it runs very well now. I'll probably end up installing Linux on the same hard drive when Feisty comes out.
Funny how people forget pc history at times.
Speaking of PC History:
http://garywiz.typepad.com/trial_by_fire/2006/03/windows_vista_p.html
dBASE had to be upward compatible at any cost, even if it meant creating extremely bloated and arcane features to support such compatibility. Why? Because of the market. The market was all Ashton-Tate had. With over 60% of the database market, and with the hint that the product may be far from perfect, compatibility became the holy grail. Compatibility assured Ashton-Tate that their market would "come along", that the effort to switch would remain higher than the effort to keep using the product.
Today, I saw the clear signs of the pattern in Microsoft's behavior. It's clear that Vista is a struggle. Regardless of whether the code rumors are true (they probably are not), the product is slipping.
WAC
The minimum system requirements for TopDesk are:
- Windows XP.
- 800 Mhz CPU.
- 256 MB RAM.
- 16 MB DirectX 8.1 compatible video card * .
And usually, the minimum specs are the minimum at which it will run... at all. I seriously doubt it runs very quickly at all on a machine with just those minimum specs. The only difference here is that MS says Vista needs a minimum 512 MB RAM and a DirectX 9 capable graphics processor.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/buyorupgrade/capable.mspx
No real reason to get Topdesk over upgrading to Vista based upon this alone. But, if you just want to keep XP and get the look/feel of Vista, I guess this would be the way to go.
I've been testing Vista since it was in beta, and wasn't impressed with it. It's nothing more than the typical resource hogging bloatware we've learned to expect from Microsoft that offers little in additional functionality. There's certainly nothing in it that will make me or my end users more productive. We'll eventually migrate to it because everyone else does, because our users are too resistant to learning to use a different O/S, and because at the end of the day, we're as stupid as everyone else.
We are no more productive today than we were 10 years ago when we were using Windows NT and Lotus CCMail. The only exception to that is the USB support we've had since Windows 2000.
Oh yeah, and our end users have been tremendously dumbed down by Microsoft products. They are less computer savvy today than they were 10 years ago.
W
We'll eventually migrate to it because everyone else does, because our users are too resistant to learning to use a different O/S, and because at the end of the day, we're as stupid as everyone else.
I think this is a poor excuse to resist trying something different. It's like staying in the JW religion because it's the only thing you know. Windows changes things with every OS. When I started up Vista, I was quite lost. Almost as lost as when I installed Ubuntu. But I'm slowly learning how to use it. My biggest problem is I've been so conditioned by MS software over the past 10 years that I've forgotten what it's like to use something completely different.
I used to do a lot of programming in BASIC. I've programmed on mostly Commodore machines, but I ventured out into the world of Apple, the TRS-80, and the PC. They're all quite different in how they work, but I could do identical things in each one. Their versions of BASIC slightly varied, but I learned what changes I had to make an applied them as needed. I became quite good at making one BASIC program run on many different systems.
People are generally afraid of change, and Microsoft is making money off that fear. I've personally been threatening to move to Linux for at least 10 years. I'm finally doing it even though it's a slow process.
As a side note, I've rekindled my love for programming in BASIC, but I do it on something much more portable now:
whooooooosh
thats the sound of it all going over my head
*sniff*
I sometimes miss my old C64 too...
I think this is a poor excuse to resist trying something different. It's like staying in the JW religion because it's the only thing you know.
That's exactly how I feel about it. Convincing the computer illiterate directors who handle the purse strings is another matter.
W
Vista --- What a disappointment.
I was a beta tester from the beginning -- went through all the betas and RC's and had high hopes -- even had visions of migrating some customers to Vista during 2007.
Comes the final release and there's too many compatibilitly problems do deal with. Where to start?
Well for one, it was not fullly compatible with any MS domain controller including Win 2003 R2 and SBS 2003 R2. --Screams as soon as clientsetup tries to run. (A server-side patch for this problem has since been issued)
It was not and is not fully compatible with many major new software packages, like AutoCAD 2007 for example. (Supposed to work with 08 though)
It was not and is not compatible with existing drivers for most of the hardware you're likely to find in an enterprise environment. This includes everything from digital copy machines in offices to numeric controllers on automated equipment in manufacturing facilities.
If the folks at Microsoft are hoping for any revenue from Vista beyond new computer sales, I'm afraid they're in store for a well-desreved reality check. The migration from 2000 Pro to XP Pro was nothing like this.
I'm just waiting to see how many hard drives crash in the next 6 months. The extra security does look worth while in of itself . not being able to uninstall some programs sounds like a problem waiting to happen .