Office 2007 product key

[Deleted User]

pcombo wrote: »

And the UAC is annoying there is no need for it to be there.

The need to prevent people using accounts with administrative privileges on a day to day basis was very, very necessary.

Well the more process you have the more memory is use the more the cpu works transfering data back and forth with virtual.

It doesn't necessarily translate that way, but generally the overall security benefits of splitting processes overrides any minute impact on performance.

pcombo

Not for someone like me. I have my own personal views on all this you may love it i dont know but i know alot of people who will agree with me on what i say.

[Deleted User]

pcombo wrote: »

Not for someone like me. I have my own personal views on all this you may love it i dont know but i know alot of people who will agree with me on what i say.

And what are those views, I'm interested?

pcombo

I just explained over 2 pages. My dislike to windows 7 and vista.

spaceboy

Well I have 2GB RAM and never seem to go above about 40% usage with Windows 7, and that's using integrated graphics. It stays below 30% using Firefox and Office. So basically I could get away with just 1GB RAM no problem.

pcombo

lol I could have 16gb ram etc and still wont like it. I am just so fussy to what i like.

edit: lol i dont like integrated stuff

[Deleted User]

pcombo wrote: »

I just explained over 2 pages. My dislike to windows 7 and vista.

It's a good job the progression of Windows isn't moving at the slowest paced then..

spaceboy

pcombo wrote: »

lol I could have 16gb ram etc and still wont like it. I am just so fussy to what i like.

edit: lol i dont like integrated stuff

Yes I can see what sort of person you are.

ormus

ive had my copy of windows 7 here for a month now.
still not installed it! i like my XP too much.

way better than vista though. vista seems like another ME disaster.
im glad i missed it completely.

spud17

I'm not sure what measure of anything the number of processes concurrently running is.

It was admittedly a pretty poor response to the post about not wanting more than 35 processes running , the implication being Vista/Win7 has dozens more, it is obviously not true.

I used my figures to illustrate my point.

Why pick 35?

There are many hijackthis logs posted on this forum, with 60/70 processes running on XP.

To add, surely what the PC is being used for, or what carpy toolbars etc, the user has installed, dictates the number of running processes.

So I agree with you.