Windows 7 LITE (web version vs. vliting)

#1
I have Windows 7 on a dozen home, office and family computers but wanted to try a lite version on an old HP 510 laptop and Gateway 700 with limited 528 ram. I downloaded the popular Windows.7.Beta.Build.7000.LiTE (1,43gb) from the web, it activated with MS Win7 key and works perfectly on both machines using only 220-230mb ram at idle. I haven't bothered to increase the 528 ram on either machine as it never maxes out during multi-tasking internet, word and WMP streaming, or Quickbooks and other office usage on the Gateway.

Have now vlited about 20 trial versions to compare to the web Windows 7 LITE on second laptop partition.. I consistently get limited filesharing to the other 5 computers (all running Win7) here at my house, and never can get Sleep to show up in Power Options. Both of these work fine in the web Win7lite.

There is only one flaw in the web version which is a DLL error bug with Sticky Notes. It goes away when you simply remove System 32 "StikyNot.exe" file, taking ownership following steps found by Googling "how to delete a system 32 file." Once I did this, my ram use at idle dropped from 320mb to 228mb. You can also activate it using Windows 7 beta keys from MS.

Has anyone found a config on vlited versions of Windows lite that will make full file sharing and Sleep work? Until then, days of research have led me to believe the still-popular Windows.7.Beta.Build.7000.LiTE on the web is the way to go at 1.43gb using 220 ram at idle which never maxes out my 528mb ram on this old laptop used for internet browsing, word processing and WMP streaming, and the Gateway desktop used in the office for Quickbooks also only has 528.,
 


Last edited:
#2
How well does Windows 7 handle 512MB?

Here's an interesting article from Ed Bott about running Windows 7 in a machine with only 512 Megs of ram:
How well does Windows 7 handle 512MB? | Ed Bott’s Microsoft Report | ZDNet.com

You might try installing a full version, and let us know how it works for you.
 


#3
Win7 full vs. LITE

I am judging by many other types of machines where I have already installed the full 32- and 64-bit o.s.'s and they use more ram, usually showing about 30-50% on the meter at idle for machines with 2, 1.5 and 1 gig. However Ed's post has got me interested in trying the full 32 bit on my laptop to see how it compares with LITE, and an even smaller version I just successfully vlited off of the LITE files which idles at 208 mb. Thanks for the tip - usually don't miss Ed.
 


This website is not affiliated, owned, or endorsed by Microsoft Corporation. It is a member of the Microsoft Partner Program.