If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
DSH |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
Hi
Vista needs that amount of disk space for the initial installation. -- Will Denny MS-MVP Shell/User Please reply to the Newsgroup Please reply to the Newgroups "D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message ... Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? DSH |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 05:36:19 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines"
wrote: Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? My install (business version) takes up just under 9 GB. That's after it was installed. Needs more room TO install when it expands cab files and makes backups, etc.. So the 15 GB free minimum Microsoft says you need is pretty close to minimum I guess. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
"Initial Installation"...
And how much after that? DSH "Will Denny" wrote in message ... Hi Vista needs that amount of disk space for the initial installation. -- Will Denny MS-MVP Shell/User Please reply to the Newsgroup Please reply to the Newgroups "D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message ... Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? DSH |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
Hi
The disk space used after the installation goes down dependent on what has been installed - 9/10 GBs perhaps. -- Will Denny MS-MVP Shell/User Please reply to the Newsgroup Please reply to the Newgroups "D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message ... "Initial Installation"... And how much after that? DSH "Will Denny" wrote in message ... Hi Vista needs that amount of disk space for the initial installation. -- Will Denny MS-MVP Shell/User Please reply to the Newsgroup Please reply to the Newgroups "D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message ... Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? DSH |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
It's a rather large OS, but nothing really to worry about in this day and
age of 500gb drives....I have Vista on a separate 60gb SATA drive and right now it only has ~20gb free, with nothing especially large on it other than a couple games, but that's why I have additional 310gb of space :-) "Adam Albright" wrote in message ... On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 05:36:19 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines" wrote: Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? My install (business version) takes up just under 9 GB. That's after it was installed. Needs more room TO install when it expands cab files and makes backups, etc.. So the 15 GB free minimum Microsoft says you need is pretty close to minimum I guess. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
This includes the space needed to copy files during the installation. This
space is returned after the installation. -- Ronnie Vernon Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User "D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message ... Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? DSH |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
D. Spencer Hines wrote:
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? Others have explained about the install requirements. As for "in use", I wouldn't run Vista on anything less than a 60Gb partition... and would be far happier with 80 to 100Gb if you keep your applications on the same partition as the OS. Now that people want miracle applications and OSes that do everything and now that hard disks are so cheap, the amount of disk space consumed by new stuff is only going to increase. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
Yes, I understand that Vista "only" consumes about 9 GB of disk space after
installation is complete, depending on what is installed. But I'm currently running XP Pro and even with all my programs installed and many other files in storage, I'm only consuming 16.44 GB. What I need to know is what this very bloated piece of software called Vista will do for me that XP Pro won't and I still haven't heard it. I need TEN Good Reasons why I should upgrade to Vista and I've yet to hear them. Microsoft needs to do a better marketing job on Vista. I'm very Pro-Microsoft, a stockholder and long-time user -- but Microsoft needs to SHOW ME the advantages of Vista -- and "Transparent Windows" and other rinky-dink cosmetic enhancement simply don't cut it. TEN Good Reasons to buy Vista -- in bullet form, like this: 1. ------------ 2. ------------ 3. ------------ And so forth. I haven't seen it. DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
Do your own research! How are the users here supposed to know your likes,
dislikes, and how you work. After you get the list together, then you can come back and tell us the ten best reasons you like Vista. Windows Vista: Home Page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...a/default.mspx -- Ronnie Vernon Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User "D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message ... Yes, I understand that Vista "only" consumes about 9 GB of disk space after installation is complete, depending on what is installed. But I'm currently running XP Pro and even with all my programs installed and many other files in storage, I'm only consuming 16.44 GB. What I need to know is what this very bloated piece of software called Vista will do for me that XP Pro won't and I still haven't heard it. I need TEN Good Reasons why I should upgrade to Vista and I've yet to hear them. Microsoft needs to do a better marketing job on Vista. I'm very Pro-Microsoft, a stockholder and long-time user -- but Microsoft needs to SHOW ME the advantages of Vista -- and "Transparent Windows" and other rinky-dink cosmetic enhancement simply don't cut it. TEN Good Reasons to buy Vista -- in bullet form, like this: 1. ------------ 2. ------------ 3. ------------ And so forth. I haven't seen it. DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 15:46:20 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines"
wrote: Yes, I understand that Vista "only" consumes about 9 GB of disk space after installation is complete, depending on what is installed. But I'm currently running XP Pro and even with all my programs installed and many other files in storage, I'm only consuming 16.44 GB. What I need to know is what this very bloated piece of software called Vista will do for me that XP Pro won't and I still haven't heard it. I need TEN Good Reasons why I should upgrade to Vista and I've yet to hear them. Microsoft needs to do a better marketing job on Vista. I'm very Pro-Microsoft, a stockholder and long-time user -- but Microsoft needs to SHOW ME the advantages of Vista -- and "Transparent Windows" and other rinky-dink cosmetic enhancement simply don't cut it. Me too, I'm also pro Microsoft, a long time user and stockholder. TEN Good Reasons to buy Vista -- in bullet form, like this: I can't give you five "good" reasons. That begs the question why I and others did upgrade. Ok, a fair question. For me, and I'm sure it is true for a lot of people I upgraded for a single reason, I sometimes still dabble in writing code, I'm still fairly active in creating web content and since I also author a lot of DVD content I NEED to see how each new OS performs. As simple as that. While Vista is being touted as a new "major" release, I don't see it that way. To me and to many, it is mostly a face lift and a needed one. Windows in XP was getting tired looking and a bit behind the times. Vista, especially if your system can support Aero is slicker, visually. I guess that's a benefit, but hardly one that justifies the cost of upgrading. Several little things have been fixed. About time! One thing I do like is now with Windows Explorer when you drag and drop files you get a tiny little pop up that TELLS you what folder you're over which avoids a long time annoyance of mine, hoving over a folder and if you do it hundreds of times a day it was too easy to be in a hurry and "drop" the file in the folder above or below your intented target. Now that's less likely. Vista's help system is much improved over XP. So is how details about where your files are for example when clicking on Start then All Programs. No more annoying ever expanding to the right list that takes over your monitor. Now each category opens in the same window and scrolls in place. Takes a little getting used to, but better once you get use to the change. Believe it or not (except for UAC) Vista is less of a nag and actually tries to be more helpful. Little windows pop up and give more specific information like when installing new hardware, information in Event logs is better, Control Panel has undergone a major face lift. I'm sure there are many improvements under the hood I haven't had time to explore yet. These and any one of many little things may be enough for somebody to consider upgrading a good idea. Asking to make a list is simply too difficult not knowing everybody's likes or dislikes in XP and saying if or not they've been fixed, or made worse. One thing that does seem to be a glaring mistake was forcing UAC on users without asking if they wanted it forcing you to discover how to turn UAC off as opposed to learning on to turn it on if you want it. I bet that will get changed. Quick. Its ****ing off a lot of users. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
... Yes, I understand that Vista "only" consumes about 9 GB of disk space after -chop- TEN Good Reasons to buy Vista -- in bullet form, like this: 1. ------------ 2. ------------ 3. ------------ [Features new to Windows Vista] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature..._Windows_Vista -- Saucy -- For email: guidsaucy at hotmail dot com |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
Keith Schaefer wrote:
It's a rather large OS, but nothing really to worry about in this day and age of 500gb drives.... Right! The way I always think it should be looked at is not in terms of megabytes or gigabytes, but in terms of the dollar cost (substitute your own local currency, if necessary) of providing hard disk space for the operating system. My first hard drive, about 20 years ago, was 20MB, and cost $200. DOS used about 1MB, or $20 worth, of that drive. Today, one can readily buy a 250GB drive for less than half of that, $90 or so. That makes the cost of 18GB around $6.50. And that's without even considering that 20-year old dollars were worth much more than today's dollars. The cost of providing space for the operating system has gone down substantially and continues to go down substantially all the time. Modern versions of Windows do much more and do it much more easily than 20-year-old versions of DOS. I think it's wonderful that we can get so much more capability while still spending much less for the disk space needed for it. It's hard for me to understand someone's getting upset about an operating system's using $6.50 worth of disk space. -- Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User Please reply to the newsgroup Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 09:11:24 -0000, "Robert Moir"
wrote: D. Spencer Hines wrote: Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? Others have explained about the install requirements. As for "in use", I wouldn't run Vista on anything less than a 60Gb partition... and would be far happier with 80 to 100Gb if you keep your applications on the same partition as the OS. Now that people want miracle applications and OSes that do everything and now that hard disks are so cheap, the amount of disk space consumed by new stuff is only going to increase. True enough, I gave Windows a 50 GB partition to play with. What gripes me as a old dog seat of the pants programmer from way back is Windows is beyond bloated. Far beyond. Somebody said 500 million lines of code? I don't know if that's true, but BIG sure describes Windows Vista. A sobering thought... many of your are probably too young to remember or weren't even alive when NASA way back in 1969 landed men on the moon. The computer onboard that got them there and back (actually there were three) had less computing power than today's average desktop caculator. Back then "programmers" knew how to write tight code. They had too, not much memory to play with. Today's generation who fancy themselves "software engineers" don't know how to write tight compact code. They only know how to write bloatware and need hundreds of thousands of lines of code, sometimes millions. This is progress? No it isn't for one simple reason. We're all human. Humans make mistakes. Its in our nature. The point is the more lines of code you have the more prone you are to introducing mistakes. If Vista is anywhere near as big as some claim that means even if it is 99% error free there are still many thousands, likely tens of thousands of lines of buggy programming, much of it yet still to surface. Hackers will find it and exploit it. Take that to the bank. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space?
One poster who complained loudly about Vista's 18GB of space on his computer
finally admitted that 6GB of that was his own emails and the backup of those emails left behind by the Vista upgrade process. On top of that, he has a 120GB raid drive on his PC. I wouldn't run Vista on a 120GB drive. Not that you can't do it but that's just so lame. If you really want to have the state of the art OS, wouldn't you like to have at least a current model drive size? Dale "D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message ... Does Vista Actually Want 18 Gigabytes Of Disc Space? DSH |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|