Star Trek Armada II: Fleet Operations

Ok im running vista on 512 MB of RAM and ill get 1 GB this weekend but is there any way to speed vista up with 512 MB?

Well seeing for vista they need 1gb ram min you my wont to get 2gb. :innocent:If you had a mac cerint OS and the next gen OS need only 500 mb min.

Unfocinitly no mca FO vertion yet....

Vista's bare minimum is 512 are far as I know, but I wouldn't install it without 2 gigs myself.

I looked them both up. One of the complaints for windows users is that it has to much "Crap in it" that most people don't need but pay for.


all those fetchers take up ram and windows has not done any where as much optimization and quality control as they should look the the space it takes up in your comes HD.

I just looked it up again and theirs some new details I must have mist be for. "Home" needs only 512 but it lacks basic sucratty components found in the next level of from things I have read in the past. Its recommended that you don't use "Home".

Windows Vista: Recommended System Requirements (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/editions/systemrequirements.mspx)

ILLOGICAL PREFERENCE ALERT! TAKE COVER IMMEDIATELY!

four words.

macs suck! Windows RULZ!

Illogical preference has passed.

I used Vista on a PC with 1Gb of RAM (and an AMD Athlon64 processor), and it ran as smoothly as an android's bottom. Not sure what the graphics card was, but it was NVidia, and the PC was bought recently. It seems that 1Gb is a good basic level to start from.

I have to agree, for future proofing reasons, I'd aim for 2Gb RAM, which will make Vista about as fast as a galaxy class starship  :thumbsup:. I recently "built" a PC on Gaming pc, custom pc, gaming system, custom gaming pc, gaming pcs (http://www.wired2fire.co.uk) with the following specs:

Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.66 Ghz, 1066MHz FSB (Fast little bad-ass processor, lots of instructions per clock cycle and large FSB)
RAM: 2Gb Corsair thingy stuff
Graphics Card: NVidia 8800 GTX - Bad ass graphics card
Hard Disk: 150 Gb Raptor, super fast mother
Basic needs, like wireless card, USB and other connections, and Windows Vista Premium.
No monitor.

Whole thing came to about £700 if I remember, so that's just less than double the dollars. Amazing what you can get for 1500 dollars these days. This thing would run Vista like a well oiled machine.

I've been using vista for a couple of months now, and I really, really like it compared to xp and to mac os's. Mac seems to have too many frills which I don't need; i.e. graphics for popping open windows and stuff like that... at a much higher price. Plus, shutting down programs with macs is hard, freezing really irritates me with them, and few games  :crybaby:. True, macs have their merits in os... but I can't think of any right now :p. Xp was just plain ugly for me... I hated the way it looked as vista looks so clean compared to it. True, every os lacks something; that's why there is always a next version, but I still prefer vista over the mac equivalent. (Vista I think is supposed to be a transition os anyway)

I using a mac now if you don't do any that compromise its, its integrity is Very reliable Mac has a few short coming That annoy me.

I have not use Vista but I have heard bad things and from what I see is not appealing to me.

Macs gaming is changing change is slow. But if you look at their hard ware they are more game friendly with boot camp you are fine for games.

Macs target it productivity, reliability, and comfort. PCs seems to be Productivity, Massive profits, and games.

boot camp?
doesn't that let you run windows on a mac?

didn't mac users used to make fun of Windows users for running windows?
 :lol:

No not at all. Its better than PCs boot camp  ^-^ .... umm THEY DON'T HAVE ONE :crybaby:

they dont need one. they already run windows! :woot:

osx... Duhh. Come on man I don't even need to make joke.

Now this cannot possibly be true: "Macs target it productivity, reliability, and comfort. PCs seems to be Productivity, Massive profits, and games."

When you compare prices between equivalent macs and other computers (pc just means personal computer so.... you must mean microsoft computers right? sorry  ^-^) macs always come out more expensive. I know this is not directly related, but all companies want massive profits and if you have seen the news recently, you can see that apple products in general are much more expensive than their equivalents (think ipod and iphone price cuts as of late). I am not sure about the other classifications; I would say that you are right, macs do target style and looks ... though I'd say their performance is a bit lacking: they switched to intel didn't they? I haven't worked long enough on a mac to test reliability... but the ones I've used have had their share of crashes and error messages--only I couldn't get the computer to fix itself using a dos-like format, instead I had to hard reboot (aaaargh!). That's gotta be my personal big peeve with using macs though, same goes for a couple of other companies too.

It would be nice to have something like boot camp though; it is being released in the next version of windows however (don't know when though). All in all, all computer companies learn from eachother and share eachother's ideas: legally and through espionage  :shifty:.

yes but think about it how many people use Windows and mac at the same time if one was allot better than the other we would all change over time its not like loads of people are coming over to the mac side because its better or vica verca :ermm:

Well look at the soft where and if you consitter the under dog must fite harder to get attiton. For make it means spindling allot on ads they need to pay for all of this. Mac has done even more then most PC manufacturers to offer cheeped options.

If you look at what you get for the munnie you will see its much more then you would get from a stander PC. Like duel prosseser that give you close to 2x the speed. the tech support is better then most to all PC services.


Meredith
In the next OSX version will have boot camp 2.0 that will let you load windows in 3 difrent ways.
1) as a fully loaded OS
2) a fully loaded emulation running in OSX.
3) a quick load emulation in a window like OS9 for pre osx apps.

newer pc's also have dual core.

and if you want to get windows on a mac,
just buy a windows computer

No dual dual core prosser

It cost alot more to by 2 computers.

I... don't understand... (No dual dual core prosser) but microsoft had dual core tech before macs; hence the switch to intel chips by macs. Quad core has come out too by the way... but I don't think macs support it yet. Never tried the tech support; have you? Could you perhaps tell me how it's better (I seriously would like to know for my own benefit, I am not patronizing you)?

2 dual processors. or 2 quad core processor making their top computer a 8 core processor.

Well seeing that IBM had some problems and they made mac processors prior to Intel and needed to chage the back round programing to maintain the performents enjoyed my mac users.
Posted on: 14 September 2007, 08:38:03

---

Lol, that's quite the leap in computing power... unfortunately to buy that requires a good deal of money... as well as buying for only a period of 2-3 months (when the next set of super comps come out)

ANY ways... no program so far supports even quad core (barely any support dual core) so I feel in general its kinda a waste. Cool update though. Too bad the video card's crud, but man oh man, 2 Terabites of space. wow. cool :woot:
Too bad I will never have enough to even fill 1% of that, lol.
So what about the tech support, could you tell me pretty please?

Edit: just did some research and it turns out that comp can only run xp on os Tiger. Boo hoo.

apple soft ware will do a some what purchasable job at taking advantage of them in apples key note they shoded a huge image being rendered on final cut pro on a stander dual core and a 64 bit CPU the 64 bit was like 40% to 60% on the os which will be out next month.

well for me I would still buy a quad core not because It would do good for a game but for multi tasking if you have a dule core you know what I mean you can be watching videos surfing the internet and compressing files with no slow down or lots of other different programs

and you are saying you cant fill fill 1% of 2 terabites that is 20 GB ok I guess Im just a space hog I use 400 GB at least

You can fit 4 hard drive in the chassis and it maxis out at 18 gigs of ram. You can buy PC of this power but thare few and far between.

This mac I sheer is used my pixsar, Lucius arts, and more. The computers are made for hevey graphic rendering movies and stuff like that. Its hard to fide some thing that can out do these bad ass's.

If you put 4 500gb HD that would be 2 taribites.

i have one solution to runnin vista on 512 MB

Windows ReadyBoost hehe