Sure it can be install, but all it's good for is internet browsing, checking mail.... and when you install a avp, it will be a pain, when you do a scan!
Good info Gen, but I'd stick to XP SP3 for anything near Win7 minimal specs. I dual boot Win7 x64and XP x86 with the same exact apps (office, fw, av, media players etc...) and the difference in ram used at idle ranges any where from 600 to 700 megs+. I got ram to spare but couldn't go to Win 7 with a gig of ram and an AMD Athlon =P.
why even bother trying to run something that doesn't meet specs. If it is close then yeah you can try, but if it is not even in the same ballpark why even try.
Thanks for all your tweaks for 7, it's chirurgical and i really appreciate your tweaks. You are a Tune up utilities 2010 KILLER a System Mechanic and Guess KILLER TOO Regards JAHL.
Slight correction. DVD-RW is not needed and will not help performance. Many Netbooks have Win7 installed and running fine great with no optical drive. (even with AERO enabled and 1GB of RAM.)
Old Laptop I have an old DELL Inspiron 1100 with Pentium 4 CPU 2.19 GHZ and 640 Ram which is running Windows 7 Ultimate and Office 2010 Beta! It works fine for me it's not like my desktop with 4gig ram but it is workable in speed!
a dvd drive has nothing to do with performance. one would need it only to install win7, as most ppl have a win7 dvd. if you have the install on a usb flashdrive, you obviously don't need a dvd drive.
Exactly! Just saying that as to the 4 requirements listed, they are either required for installation or to provide needed performance. The DVD-RW is not a requirement or needed for either. Based on first post, some might think that without a DVD-RW, they do not meet the requirements and can not install. Having a DVD-RW will have no effect and is not needed at all. Even if you have a DVD-RW, alternative methods such as USB install are preferred.