Page 1 of 2
Windows Longhorn
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 4:30 pm
by Guest
Lol you know what sucks about it? Since the min. requirements include 512MB RAM, that means you should have 1GB if you want it to run good and 2GB for AWESOME
that sucks... In other words, by the year 2006,
if you want to use Windows Longhorn you should have like 1.5GB ++ of RAM if ur l337 and play new games and stuff... jesus! must kill m$! lOL
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 4:44 pm
by Q12321
I read an article from 2000 that said by 2007, processers should be able to handle 1 terrahert (or whatever 1000 Ghz would be).
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 5:13 pm
by mannyace
maybe by the time longhorn is offically released 512 mb ram wont be that much
think bout it, thas how it always is... i remember when processors first broke into the GHz lol
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 5:45 pm
by Guest
Q12321 wrote:I read an article from 2000 that said by 2007, processers should be able to handle 1 terrahert (or whatever 1000 Ghz would be).
Bullshit. Intel delayed 4GHz til' next year as well!
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 5:45 pm
by Guest
mayb ur rite easter
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 5:50 pm
by Q12321
I7Iz490N wrote:Q12321 wrote:I read an article from 2000 that said by 2007, processers should be able to handle 1 terrahert (or whatever 1000 Ghz would be).
Bullshit. Intel delayed 4GHz til' next year as well!
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 5:55 pm
by Guest
Yeah, I still say it's bullshit LOL no matter WHAT you say!
MAIN reason: Both CPU manufacturing giants are not focusing on clock speed as much now.
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 6:38 pm
by palmboy5
i heard they moved it to 2008... think... thats 4 years... in 2000 we officially passed the 1ghz barrier (got to 1GHz in 1999)
and wtfs up with an article talking about a windows version before its predecessor even came out?!
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 9:44 pm
by 2005
as i see it they will tweak longhorn alot before they release it... remember not everyone has 3000 dollars to spend on a pc, ALOT of people use very cheap computers... ones not even as good as mine. So i think alot of longhorn will be tuned down a little or they will make remove some of the more performance hungry sides of the os.
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 10:17 pm
by 2005
oh yea and drag, i think i solved the burn issue... over burn it using nero. i dont know if you will get 33 mb with a immage like that, but you can get up to 100 more mb with a disk.
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 10:07 am
by victimizati0n
i red an article this year that wais loghorn will need at least a 6 GHz processor
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 10:13 am
by mannyace
that doesnt sound too bad... longhorn is supposed to b out in 2006 (i think) and we'll b hitting 4GHz in the near future, by then... 6GHz sounds right
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 12:16 pm
by Guest
palmboy5 wrote:i heard they moved it to 2008... think... thats 4 years...
and wtfs up with an article talking about a windows version before its predecessor even came out?!
Palm, it's coming out in 2006. Windows Codename Blackcomb is coming out in approximately 2010. <PWNED!>
palmboy5 wrote:in 2000 we officially passed the 1ghz barrier (got to 1GHz in 1999)
LOL that's sad. It's been 4 years, and we're still at around 3.6GHz--
AND 4GHz is delayed until next year.
2005 wrote:as i see it they will tweak longhorn alot before they release it... remember not everyone has 3000 dollars to spend on a pc, ALOT of people use very cheap computers... ones not even as good as mine. So i think alot of longhorn will be tuned down a little or they will make remove some of the more performance hungry sides of the os.
Maybe.
2005 wrote:oh yea and drag, i think i solved the burn issue... over burn it using nero. i dont know if you will get 33 mb with a immage like that, but you can get up to 100 more mb with a disk.
I'll try it. Thanks lovable jock-boy!
victimizati0n wrote:i red an article this year that wais loghorn will need at least a 6 GHz processor
At least!?!? Jesus. I don't think it will..
That article must have been bullshit. Lol. By the time Longhorn comes out, we'll probably only have like 6GHz CPU's MAXIMUM! Reason: New CPU making scheme--lower clock speed--do more per clock or whatever
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:01 pm
by palmboy5
i bet were gonna stop at 4GHz and continue with CPUs with multiple cores
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:05 pm
by mannyace
i wish i had a million billion GHz...