Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Mike Easter Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Ask Usenet: XPocalypse Now Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 12:00:46 -0700 Lines: 20 Message-ID: References: <5791#0@usenet.squte.com> <5791#0@usenet.squte.com> <6rikk9pb48c01lrjhgsv2vm0egairnhg9r@dim53.demon.nl> <534b34a2$0$2914$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net ytP9aF8feYpnuE3OMlYFrAGT+S8q+NKRybRR7WCFMM3pmA0O7C Cancel-Lock: sha1:0rJoqf68lvntQNVBxCJKbav80vQ= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.misc:2383 RS Wood wrote: > Do you - or does anybody - have Win8 working on a Netbook though? The 'stereotypical' (early) netbook is the Asus Eee with 1 G ram, a 900 MHz Celeron and a small SSD storage. I think the Aspire One/s were also more frequently sold with less than 2G ram. So, the range of hardware on netbooks went from really low resources to comparable to laptops, with more of them pretty low for anything requiring more resources than XP than those with more hardware. Supposedly Win8.1 uses its resources/ram more 'resourcefully' than does Win7. -- Mike Easter