>Windows 7 requirements >16-20GB of free space What the

Are you retarded?

>>57593464
No, seriously, explain to me why GNU/LINUX kernels take up only 500MB-1GB of space and Windows takes up half of the fucking galaxy

>>57593273
botnet

>>57593489
1. Compability
2. Actual features
3. Windows is more than a kernel

>>57593520
this
/thread

>>57593520
So just lines of fucking code
There's literally no reason why it should be taking up this much space
Even using windirstat you can see most of the space is taken up by backups of old drivers and shit that you don't really need

>>57593511
this
/thread

>>57593273
Windows assures backwards compatibility by having highly duplicated libraries, binaries, configurations, etc.
Aka winsxs

>>57593538
By that logic, why do games take up 30 gigs. I mean, after all they're just lines of code too.

>>57593273
the OS has a lot of compatibility Libraries that were used in previous operating systems. Windows 8 and 10 reduced their sizes by removing much of these compatibility features at the expense that old hardware/software is now useless

>>57593538
>just lines of code

yes in all retrospect an operating system, kernel, drivers and firmware is "just lines of code"

>>57593489

If you weren't retarded you would notice that any GNU/Linux distro also requires 15ish GB of free space. That's because it accounts for daily use space, meaning that if all you have is a 20GB HDD, that's enough to install the OS and then do everything you need to do with it such as writing documents and browsing and whatever. It's 20GB to install and use.

>>57593584
High resolution textures and models
Only graphics windows has are made in mario paint or some shit

>>57593584
because gigantic textures, uncompressed sounds and assets take up a lot of space.

>>57593627
>any GNU/Linux distro also requires 15ish GB of free space

?
I used Manjaro and that used like 2GB out of the box

>>57593651

>Thirty gigabytes (GB) of hard disk space

Manjaro minimum requirement of HDD. I'm afraid that you might be too dumb to understand.

>>57593538
>So just lines of fucking code
Not sure if you can speak of "lines" given that it's all compiled binary (and obviously also data).

>>57593667
Then how did it work if I installed it on an 8GB flash drive, Einstein?

Op see:
>>57593673
>>57593603
>>57593560
>>57593520
Your question has been answered multiple of times.

Vista Bugfixes

>>57593560
>winsxs
This is an abomination.

Though, truth be told, if you install XP SP3 and then supplant it with all the .NET frameworks, updates, other runtimes and other stuff that's necessary for the OS to be usable, it will also grow significantly. I used to keep a 10GiB system volume in the mid 00s, but 5 to 10 years later it was way to small, it required at least 20GiB even if you installed only a limited number of applications onto the system volume.

>>57593691

>he still doesn't understand it

The minimum specs amount for user space you goddamned retard. Why would you want to install it in a 512MB disk if then you won't be able to save any files because no space? That's why the minimum requirements included a couple dozen free GBs for the user to use.

>>57593731
>The minimum specs amount for user space

But the windows folder takes up 26GB and none of it is user space

>>57593769
Maybe on botnet Windows 10. A fresh 7 install takes up about 15GB total, IIRC.

>>57593783
I'm using Windows 7

>>57593769
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-2758580/winsxs-folder-12gb-size-reduce.html

Try this first, the winsxs directory tends to grow to monstrous sizes and may be the main culprit in your case.

File: ss+(2016-11-20+at+04.39.36).png (9KB, 390x171px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 390x171px

>>57593813
I guess that's not an option

>>57593730
Yeah we had some old 03 boxes at work that at 12GB partitions on C: and by the end of their run they were a near constant pain in the ass to mange windows / app updates on.

>>57593972
Left with no other choice, you have to make use of the built-in compression feature to compress some of the larger directories like

>driver cache
>downloaded installations
>installer
>provisioning
>assembly
>microsoft.net
>winsxs

It still has windows 3.1 and windows 95 code in the codebase. That's why.

>>57594111
>64-bit NT has 16-bit DOS code in its codebase

>>57594184
Yes, for backwards compatibility purposes. It's actually an emulation system, but that takes just as much, if not more, code than just making the NT kernel intrinsically DOS compatible.

File: 1466790945827.jpg (3KB, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x125px

>>57593646
>uncompressed sounds

>>57593538
yes that's exactly it, it has generic drivers for everything so that it justwerks™ whatever you plug in, that takes up space.

>>57593646
games don't need about 80% of the textures they ship with

>>57594209
But 64-bit Windows doesn't support running 16-bit (i.e. DOS) code at all.

>>57593667
minimum requirement =/= recommended

>>57594061
Believe me they were as stripped down as we could manage.

Because it's the famous "it actually just werks" desktop OS. Most of that space is taken up by a fuckload of drivers that will work with almost everything.


Though I honestly don't understand how this is a problem when there are $50 2TB HDDs.

>>57594824
somebody I know was stuck with a netbook that force upgraded and only had like 25gb or so of memory. It was damn near unusable before downgrading to 7

>>57593520
>Compability
I have better hardware compatibility with Arch than I do on Windows. On Windows if plug in literally anything it will have to download a driver from remote to use it.

>Actual features
Arch comes with a C/C++ compiler, a package manager and Python at the very least while Windows comes with... umm... Internet Explorer? I suppose?

>Windows is more than a kernel
Throw the KDE on top if you want, it's still not going to come close to the size of Windows.

>>57594294
I'm gonna need a source for that.

>>57593584
That's resources like sounds and textures, which really are just that big. I've got an entire OpenGL render engine here (as a Linux binary shared object), it's 13MB and that's compiled with g++ -g for debugging, it would probably be less than half that if I compiled it in -O3. If game code was that size we'd be making the same complaint about that too.

>>57596776
18MB, sorry.

how fucking cheap are you that 20gb is a lot? nigger I have 256gb in drives on my keyring in my pocket. loosen the purse strings a bit you fucking jew

>>57596746
source: steam hardware survey

there just isn't the screen resolution to take advantage of the crazy texture resolutions they ship nowadays

they ship 4k class textures for a 1080p market, and everyone has to waste hdd space on "ultra" textures they will never see

>>57597057
>Having no fucking idea how textures and game assets work
wew lad, how's studying for your GCSEs going?

>>57597057
games don't even fully utilize 1080p resolution with textures, as in 1 pixel on screen is 1 pixel or more in texture. what pisses me off is when we get games with poorly compressed video or audio... looking at you titanfall.

>>57597057
>screen resolution is required for texture resolution
Oh no, it's retarded.

That's not how this works, even slightly. That would be the case if you were displaying the texture with a 1:1 ratio between screen pixels and texture pixels, but except for textures used in post processing (blood splatters on the screen, dirt for lens flare, etc.) that is almost never the case.

Consider a player standing 1m away from a 4m x 4m wall with a 2048x2048 texture on it with a 90 degree horizontal FOV and a 1920 x 1080 display.
The texture is technically higher resolution than the player's display but a 2m stretch of wall is within the player's view. This means the screen will be 1920 pixels wide, but the segment of texture in view only 1024 pixels wide, so interpolation will need to be used to fake a higher texture resolution. If we repeat this with a 4096 x 4096 texture, the number of pixels in that 2m segment is now 2048, enough to fill all of the fragments provided by the screen without interpolation.

>>57593584
games don't try at all to save space anymore
one time just to find out, i wrote a script that took all the uncompressed wav sound effects in Left 4 Dead 2 and compressed them to adpcm, which the source engine supports (and can be contained in wav files)
it saved over 1GB, iirc