windows longhorn specs

[john121]

this is what is expected to run the new Windows Longhorn..

the "average" Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today.

i wonder how HL3 will look on that? (if any of us can afford to run Longhorn...)

 

[The Dark Elf]

Where did you get these specs from?

 

[ray_MAN]

Isn't it supposed to come out early next year?! That's ridiculous. Did you pull that out of your ass?

 

[airoke]

No one will buy longhorn if thats the case. Its not practical for the majority of the market.

 

[lister]

Here's the link to the specs story...http://www.pjsoft.ca/node/222

 

[Hazar]

that's like 4x the normal users specs

 

[lister]

y wud u want such a high graphic demandin OS if the one your using now can do everything fine? And can most probable play most game sin the future if the case is that Longhorn still runs off the WinXP coding.

 

[airoke]

Real specs:

800 MHz Pentium III Processor
256MB RAM
32 MB video RAM

 

[lister]

i rekon that is the estimated very low end it could take

 

[The Dark Elf]

An OS should use as little resources as possible. People should be using Apps and Games, not coping with an overly fancy Operating System thats eating up everything they've added to their computer.

You've got the above specs, just for the OS.. then throw a game on top of that and well, you'll be lucky to run a spectrum emulator let alone the games and apps doing the round at the time.

It's dumb, pure and simple, as Lister basically says (before he went and edited it). Why use an OS that takes up everything and struggle, when you can use an older one that will run faster and on less memory.

 

[Muhahahaha]

STFU n00bs. Here's what I found:

Minimum requirements for the preview call for an 800-MHz Pentium III processor, 256MB of memory, and a graphics card with 32MB of video RAM. Such specs are beefier than XP requires, but Longhorn-capable systems should be commonplace by the time the OS ships.

And I see that someone else has posted this. By "average" they may mean that they expect computers to be more like that next year. I have been hearing about some nice breakthroughs along the horizon... I mean comon, processor speeds haven't been updated in a while. Not sure about the video card though... but 2GB RAM is not really that much, especially a year from now, as most are already needing 1GB.

Oh, and the 1TB of storage? We're already up to 0.4TB, so maybe... especially with SATA out now. Not that Longhorn would even take up that much space, lol.

 

[qckbeam]

What an incredibly bloated OS Longhorn must be if those requirements are even close to being true. What a monumental waste of resources.

 

[Cole]

I thought I was stupid...

 

[Muhahahaha]

Oops, I'm sorry. Apparently I got in trouble for flaming John near the beginning of this thread. I was really just messing around, I'm sorry about that.

 

[john121]

i just saw it on this site..
http://technovia.typepad.com/technovia/2004/05/longhorn_specs_.html

Longhorn specs: The Truth?

Dennis Sellers has a comment this morning on how Longhorn's putative hardware demands compare with those of a Mac, pointing to a story by Mary Jo Foley which listed the specs, from an unnamed Microsoft source.
The spec itself is pretty high end. To quote Mary Jo:

Microsoft is expected to recommend that the "average" Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today.


First of all, one minor caveat emptor: I occasionally work for eWeek.com, as does Mary Jo. I know her well enough to know that she hasn't just picked this spec out of a hat. So where's it come from? I'm sure that Mary Jo's got this from someone in Microsoft, but the important question is where did they get it from?
Because those specs are very much not the ones that Microsoft is using now to develop Longhorn. Nor are they the ones that Joe Beda, one of the guys that's working on Avalon, talks about here. And, as Scoble points out, don't forget that Longhorn needs to work on laptops and tablets too, and they certainly won't have anything like that amount of power.
In fact, I believe those specs were the ones that Bill Gates showed up on a slide at last year's Professional Developers Conference as a machine that would be possible - and possibly typical - by the time Longhorn ships. In other words, they aren't a requirement - they're the kind of machines that Longhorn needs to be able to take advantage of. WinFS, for example, needs to be able to cope with terabytes of data smoothly.

 

[john121]

Oops, I'm sorry. Apparently I got in trouble for flaming John near the beginning of this thread. I was really just messing around, I'm sorry about that.

i don't really care about getting "flamed" about this, i didn't believe those specs anyhow, that's why i put them on here....

 

[Muhahahaha]

Heh, apparently the mods do though... oh well.

 

[Muhahahaha]

Hmm... just read your clarification post. That makes sense now. Those specs are what Longhorn will be capable of supporting, not what is required.