backtop


Print 66 comment(s) - last by winterspan.. on Jun 28 at 10:16 PM


One screenshot is worth a thousand words, in this case.  (Source: The Windows Club forums)
Hacker is eager to push the new OS onto a Pentium system next

Microsoft recently released a tool that suggests to users whether or not to upgrade to Windows 7, Microsoft's hot new OS.  However, it appears that the actual hardware requirements may be much lower than Microsoft's suggestions if you have enough determination.

A user on The Windows Club's forum has cooked up the ultimate low-end Windows 7 setup.  The user who goes by "hackerman1" has managed to squeeze a working, bootable Windows 7 install onto a machine with a blazing fast 266 MHz Pentium II processor, a whopping 96 MB of SDRAM memory, and a high-tech 4 MB video card. 

The enthusiast first used 128 MB of RAM, then pushed the total down to 96 MB.  A subsequent push for 64 MB proved too much -- Windows 7 needs at least 96 MB to function properly.

Not to be content, the user is now working on a new setup, trying to install Windows 7 on a Pentium I machine featuring a 166 MHz CPU paired with a 1 MB graphics card.  He's also considered trying to make the new fancy graphics wrapping -- Aero -- work on the Pentium II setup. 

Don't expect a quick install, though -- a Pentium III-based system install took 17 continuous hours, and the Pentium II install likely took much, much more.  The Pentium III based system boots in a mere 17 minutes.

While perhaps not very practical, hackerman1's quest/obsession with putting Microsoft's newest on some rather outdated hardware provides a nice illustration of the new OS's smaller footprint.  The new OS is reported to have consolidated processes, lowered memory requirements, and reduced install size from Windows Vista, allowing it to be installed on netbooks and other non-Vista-ready machines.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Article has a misleading title
By thornburg on 6/23/2009 1:38:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Heck Windows 2000 required at least 64M of RAM, so getting 7 to work with only 96 is huge.


Win2K will boot with 32MB. I've done it. It's slower than molasses, but it will boot.

Actually, even MS says 32MB is enough:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/304297


By threepac3 on 6/23/2009 3:04:31 PM , Rating: 2
You can run XP with 32MB of RAM as well.


RE: Article has a misleading title
By Ammohunt on 6/24/2009 2:30:04 PM , Rating: 2
I sucessfully got Win95 to run on a AMD 386DX-40 with 32MB of RAM. It was interesting you could watch the system draw the dialog boxes on screen.


"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki