If you buy Windows Vista Business, Microsoft allows you free downgrade to Windows XP Pro too
*www.chotocheeta.com/2008/07/14/windows-vista-downgrade-rights-to-keep-windows-xp-alive/
What does Windows Vista Home Premium have that Windows Vista Business does not have ?
Does this switching right mean I can install a pirated windows xp version, named windows xp gamers edition, which is optimised for gaming, and dual boot it with normal windows vista ?
Need a Very Basic PC (CPU) for my C.A. Friend
He has Monitor
He Need to Run Only and Only Windows 98, Tally, MS Office thats it
He dont like Virtual PC so need some Old type Celeron or P4 processor for running Win98
Please Help
I suggest getting an
Intel Dot Station computer. It is a small computer with everything built into the monitor. It looks quite good, reminding us of classical iMacs. It has 64mb RAM, 300MHz Celeron, Intel 810 Motherboard, 10GB HDD and a 14" Colour Monitor. It has TouchPad within the keyboard instead of a mouse and comes with a phone on top for calling and dial-up.
It costs Rs. 3640 including taxes.
This is definitely one of the weakest computers ever by today's standards, but it fits his needs and Windows 98 perfectly.
^^^^^
Yes I too vote for Spider Platform
.
I don't think you do. You see, there is this issue with Spider. That config is NOT SPIDER.
Most people buying new X3 phenoms and 780G think they have spider and start flaunting that they got a gaming platform cheap. But spider is different. Spider includes ONLY Quad Core CPUs and not triple Core CPUs. Also, AMD 790FX is the spider chipset not AMD 780G. A Triple Core with 780G is something like spider with 6 legs. Not a full spider.
But what to do ? Spider is such a cool name 
But after the reviews i have seen so far e7200 came out to be better than the spider platform. As i am mainly into gaming so 3 cores might be an overkill as the third core will be doing nothing but sitting idle thats why i chose Intel e7200+abit ip35-e
Look at this review.
*www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=751&p=7
Heard the word
multitasking ? If you are multitasking, three cores would be a bigger advantage than just two. These benchmarks involve running nothing but the benchmarking software, and thats not exactly something thats seen in real life situations. Infact, dual core CPUs had the same comment, with websites like these saying everyone to get a Pentium 4 With HT at 3.8Ghz instead of a Pentium D at 2.2 GHz per core. Because games were not yet optimised for dual cores. But they had the real advantage in real life situations. And now Dual Cores are DeFacto for gaming. The same history is repeating, with it being better to invest in a Quad Core Core2Quad or PHENOM than a dual core Core2Duo or AthlonX2. Its simply more future proof.
