Windows Vista upgrade to Win7?

I have an older Compaq laptop, a Presario V5306US with 1G memory. I
upgraded the original Windows XP to Windows Vista Home Premium, why?
Because I have valid copies of Vista with valid keys and because
Compaq (HP) makes drivers available on their website but ONLY for 32
bit Vista.

So my question is can I move to Windows7? If I did would I gain any
advantage such as speed? Based on previous searches I believe I
cannot get any 64 bit drivers for the sound so we're talking about
32 bit Win7 here, I believe the Vista drivers will work with Win7 and
Windows 8, is that probably correct?

Since the laptop is limited to 2G of memory are there drawbacks to not
having a 64 bit OS?

Next, I do NOT have a copy of Win7 other than the copy of Win7
Ultimate on my desktop and, based on prices of comparable Win7
laptops, I don't know if I can buy a license cheaper than just getting
a new laptop with Win7 installed since laptops are getting very
inexpensive... I don't know if I can use my copy of Windows 8.1.

Any ideas? Should I just stick with Vista?
(I personally liked Vista and never had any problems with it.)


--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

On 10/21/2015 11:32 AM, XS11E wrote:
I have an older Compaq laptop, a Presario V5306US with 1G memory. I
upgraded the original Windows XP to Windows Vista Home Premium, why?
Because I have valid copies of Vista with valid keys and because
Compaq (HP) makes drivers available on their website but ONLY for 32
bit Vista.

So my question is can I move to Windows7? If I did would I gain any
advantage such as speed? Based on previous searches I believe I
cannot get any 64 bit drivers for the sound so we're talking about
32 bit Win7 here, I believe the Vista drivers will work with Win7 and
Windows 8, is that probably correct?

Since the laptop is limited to 2G of memory are there drawbacks to not
having a 64 bit OS?

Next, I do NOT have a copy of Win7 other than the copy of Win7
Ultimate on my desktop and, based on prices of comparable Win7
laptops, I don't know if I can buy a license cheaper than just getting
a new laptop with Win7 installed since laptops are getting very
inexpensive... I don't know if I can use my copy of Windows 8.1.

Any ideas? Should I just stick with Vista?
(I personally liked Vista and never had any problems with it.)


If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I upgraded to win7 only because vista would only let
me have two TV tuners and the hacks didn't work.
Most of my computers still run XP, cause it ain't broke.
Someone else's opinion of "broke" doesn't mean your system is "broke".

mike wrote:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I agee completely, it ain't broke but....

it is s l oooooo w...

I know slow ain't broke but can slow be fixed?

I can and will change from 1G ram to 2G ram, that's really cheap and
might help some.


--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

Ken1943 wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:32:54 -0700, XS11E
wrote:

Any ideas? Should I just stick with Vista?

http://www.howtogeek.com/220996/what...-about-upgradi
ng-a-windows-vista-pc-to-windows-10/
Ken1943

Thanks, that's very helpful, I CAN upgrade to Win8.1 because I have
that and have not installed it.

That would allow me to get Win10 for free BUT.... will that speed
things up? Who knows....


--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

XS11E wrote:
I have an older Compaq laptop, a Presario V5306US with 1G memory. I
upgraded the original Windows XP to Windows Vista Home Premium, why?
Because I have valid copies of Vista with valid keys and because
Compaq (HP) makes drivers available on their website but ONLY for 32
bit Vista.

So my question is can I move to Windows7? If I did would I gain any
advantage such as speed? Based on previous searches I believe I
cannot get any 64 bit drivers for the sound so we're talking about
32 bit Win7 here, I believe the Vista drivers will work with Win7 and
Windows 8, is that probably correct?

Since the laptop is limited to 2G of memory are there drawbacks to not
having a 64 bit OS?

Next, I do NOT have a copy of Win7 other than the copy of Win7
Ultimate on my desktop and, based on prices of comparable Win7
laptops, I don't know if I can buy a license cheaper than just getting
a new laptop with Win7 installed since laptops are getting very
inexpensive... I don't know if I can use my copy of Windows 8.1.

Any ideas? Should I just stick with Vista?
(I personally liked Vista and never had any problems with it.)

Vista SP2 should be fine, and try to max the RAM if you can.

There aren't too many software products yet that are 64 bit only.
The Adobe Creative Suite might be an example, but you probably
wouldn't want to run such payware (subscription) using that
amount of RAM.

There are only a few extreme examples of performance
improvements with a 64 bit capability. I used some
sample code (C and C++) for mersenne primes, and the
GNU GMP library is 80% faster in 64 bit mode versus
32 bit mode (the theoretical best it could do is
be 100% faster or twice as fast). Many other non-math
softwares, the difference might be 5% (most of the code
is filled with branches, and counting variables don't need
64 bits - the 64 bits isn't helping).

A 32 bit OS runs 32 and 16 bit apps (important for
older 16 bit installer code - it's not usually the
application which is 16 bit, just the crusty installer).

A 64 bit OS runs 64 bit and 32 bit apps, but then
any older software using a 16 bit installer won't install.

So the only real incentive for 64 bit...

1) You have a *lot* of RAM.
2) You use high end software like Adobe Creative Suite which
is 64 bit only. And for speed reasons, some of that stuff
works better with a *lot* of RAM. Many more times RAM than
the size of object being edited (to reduce the need for
scratch disk writing). Undo buffers have to be stored
somewhere, and they make programs very slow if stored on
a disk drive. I've waited as long a two minutes, for
an undo buffer to move to disk. Glacial.

Using PAE, a computer with a 32 bit OS can access memory
above 4GB - it's the typical Microsoft Windows memory license
that restricts what you can do. For example, the WinXP SP3 x32
machine I'm typing on has 8GB of RAM, 4GB is usable by programs,
and the upper 4GB is a RAMDisk. And I can do that,
because the Microsoft memory license does not
restrict *driver* (Ring 0) memory usage. So I could
have as much as a 60GB RAMDisk, using WinXP SP3 x32 and
an Intel processor (64GB PAE implementation).

Paul

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 22:01:41 +0200, FredW wrote:

it is s l oooooo w...

Use more RAM

I'd say install a SSD if possible. More RAM doesn't necessarily mean
more speed.

--
s|b

In message , Paul
writes:
[]
A 32 bit OS runs 32 and 16 bit apps (important for
older 16 bit installer code - it's not usually the
application which is 16 bit, just the crusty installer).

A 64 bit OS runs 64 bit and 32 bit apps, but then
any older software using a 16 bit installer won't install.
[]
I've been reading this for sufficiently long and sufficiently often that
I'm willing to accept that it's true (does the same apply back into
history, assuming there is such a thing as 8 bit software?).

However, I've yet to see a good explanation of _why_ it is so - why, for
example, you can't run 16 bit software on a 64 bit OS. (Or why the OS
creator[s] decided to do things that way, if that's a better question to
ask.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"...told me to connect with the electorate, and I did!" John Prescott on
having punched the man who threw an egg at him (Top Gear, 2011-2-28)

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:35:35 -0700, XS11E wrote:

mike wrote:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I agee completely, it ain't broke but....

it is s l oooooo w...

I know slow ain't broke but can slow be fixed?

I can and will change from 1G ram to 2G ram, that's really cheap and
might help some.

Try to determine why it's slow. With your typical mix of programs running,
check Task Manager, Performance tab.

What is the CPU doing? Is it loafing, is it nearly pegged, or comfortably in
between? I like to see it well below 50% if I'm not really doing anything.

What does the RAM usage look like? Are you dipping into virtual memory? Are
you close to dipping into virtual memory; i.e., little headroom?

Would replacing the hard drive with an SSD help, or would the disk interface
be a bottleneck?

Those are a few things you could check. RAM is probably easy to upgrade, to
a point, but if the CPU is weak and pegged, that's a bit more complicated to
address. In addition to hard drive access speed, including its potential
interface speed, perhaps you could check the video subsystem to see if
that's under par. All of these things, and more, make the system what it is.

--

Char Jackson

FredW wrote:

I know slow ain't broke but can slow be fixed?

I can and will change from 1G ram to 2G ram, that's really cheap
and might help some.

If its really cheap proceed to 4 GB.

2G is max for the laptop, don't know how much it'll help but it's less
than $30 so it's worth a try.



--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

"s|b" wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 22:01:41 +0200, FredW wrote:

it is s l oooooo w...

Use more RAM

I'd say install a SSD if possible. More RAM doesn't necessarily mean
more speed.

Probably not possible, like most laptops it's not easy to upgrade any
of the hardware.

--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

In message , XS11E
writes:
"s|b" wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 22:01:41 +0200, FredW wrote:

it is s l oooooo w...

Use more RAM

I'd say install a SSD if possible. More RAM doesn't necessarily mean
more speed.

Probably not possible, like most laptops it's not easy to upgrade any
of the hardware.

Most laptops have an accessible HD; many (most?) SSDs are the form
factor of a laptop HD. (You've got the problem of transferring the OS,
but that'd apply whatever the PC and is in most cases easily
surmountable.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Science fiction is escape into reality - Arthur C Clarke

In message , XS11E
writes:
FredW wrote:

I know slow ain't broke but can slow be fixed?

I can and will change from 1G ram to 2G ram, that's really cheap
and might help some.

If its really cheap proceed to 4 GB.

2G is max for the laptop, don't know how much it'll help but it's less
than $30 so it's worth a try.

Look at the memory usage graph under task manager; if it's using nearly
all the existing RAM (or more than), then it will help significantly; if
not, it won't. (Having said that, and it's cheap as you say, it's
probably worth doing, on the basis that usage will almost inevitably
creep up, and by then it may not be as easy to find compatible memory.)


--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Science fiction is escape into reality - Arthur C Clarke

Char Jackson wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:35:35 -0700, XS11E
wrote:

I know slow ain't broke but can slow be fixed?

I can and will change from 1G ram to 2G ram, that's really cheap
and might help some.

Try to determine why it's slow. With your typical mix of programs
running, check Task Manager, Performance tab.

No programs are loaded, I've installed the OS and all the updates,
that's all. I plan to add MSFT Office later.

Main cause of slow is it's a 1.6GHz AMD Turion 64 Mobile Processor ML-
28.

Being as it's a laptop not much is upgradeable, I can bump RAM to 2g
and AFAIK that's all.


--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

Paul wrote:

XS11E wrote:
Any ideas? Should I just stick with Vista?
(I personally liked Vista and never had any problems with it.)

Vista SP2 should be fine, and try to max the RAM if you can.

2G is all it'll take but that's probably worth the $30 or so it'll
cost.


--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

In message , XS11E
writes:
"s|b" wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 22:01:41 +0200, FredW wrote:

it is s l oooooo w...

Use more RAM

I'd say install a SSD if possible. More RAM doesn't necessarily
mean more speed.

Probably not possible, like most laptops it's not easy to upgrade
any of the hardware.

Most laptops have an accessible HD; many (most?) SSDs are the form
factor of a laptop HD. (You've got the problem of transferring the
OS, but that'd apply whatever the PC and is in most cases easily
surmountable.)

There's a question of compatibility, what will an older MB and BIOS
allow? Remember, this is a very old machine, it's probably worth a try
but I'm leery of the cost and I'd have to consider the time involved.

Right now, it's doing nothing, no work, no software is installed.

And it's still slow! G All I've done since installing the OS is
Windows Updates.



--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/