Aero Question

I think it depends on which version you are running. Because I know on basic it does not and you need at least 512megs of RAM. Unless anyone else knows I would throw that question at Microsoft.

Come again....? Vista Home Basic doesn't have Aero so obviously the question doesn't apply. Other versions run Aero, but if there is a version difference I'd like to know. Let's say for the sake of the discussion that it's Vista Ultimate with 2GB of RAM.

Seabass you're correct about Vista Home Basic. The other higher end versions (Home Premium, Pro and Ultimate) allows the aero feature, but this is also based on the amount of video memory as well.

I believe the minimum system requirement to run Aero is 128 MB video memory along with the amount of system memory (RAM). So you can have 10 gigs of system RAM and Aero still won't work unless you meet the MSR for video memory.

I never thought I'd live in a generation where a gigabyte of RAM may not be enough to run an operating system.

I guess that's why I'm still on XP. No one can answer me honestly as to what I can do on Vista, that I cannot do with XP.

Hope this helps!

cp

I must be surrounded by people who don't read!!! I know what it takes to run Aero in Vista and I know which version of the OS have the ability to run it.

What I want to know is if Vista's Aero has "native" Per Pixel support.

Like seabass said, throw the question at Microsoft. These folks didn't write VISTA or Aero. And your outburst there is exactly how not to get a question answered. Take that however you want.   

JRSCCivic98 I understand you want your question answered but typing in a larger font is just like shouting. We are users of the programs just like you are. Look at your OP and we have no idea what you running, it's always wrong to assume.

I will inquire to the devs if they know in the morning. However a quick sweep through support revealed that we really didn't have the answer. Since we didn't make Aero there is little I can tell you. However I invite anyone to assist and I am a little more that curious about the answer should you contact MS on this.

Thank you. That is exactly the "comprehensive" answer I was looking for. I really appreciate it. Seems as of late you're the only one that when you really care you tend to give a comprehensive answer. I await your researched answer to this in the next few days once the other coders can give you the input on the matter. I wonder if it would be worth mentioning to maybe not tell them who asked this because I'd be willing to bet they won't answer it honestly if they knew who was interested in the info. I might be a little "over the top" on that thought, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Trust me, I'm just honestly interested in a simple yes or no rather then anything else. If the answer is yes, then I'll elaborate on the next question and where I am going with this.

I thought that's what we were doing until one of us started yelling!



Hummm funny that I'm the one being quoted when you said that, I think my help here is done!

Good luck with your quest, hope you find someone who's Iconoclastic literacy is more to your likings!

I'm out, gotta go learn how to read! 

 

cplair, seriously... reading comprehension dude. I only indicated the supposed config of Vista Ultimate with 2GB because seabass also like you at first misunderstood the question.

I think he understands now.

Basically the question applies to the fact that there's some features that Vista Aero has that WB6 does not. These features were excluded out of WB6 because they interfere with Per Pixel. So, if I can get an answer of "yes" Aero uses Per Pixel then I can then ask if Aero uses Per Pixel and still has these features why does WB6 not support them? Basically the initial excuse that was given is invalidated. I have a feeling that Vista Aero most certainly supports Per Pixel , so obviously the question is... why is WB6 for Vista so limited when it comes to certain features?