Do you have the same thoughts of what I thought?

Windows 7 can run in 192MB RAM(maybe under).

And the installation must have at least 512MB RAM to run.

Is that very funny?

The microsoft make the appearance of the installation beautiful(For me, it still ugly), but it need to use 512MB RAM to run it.

We don't need the beautiful in the installation.

If they use the installation like Windows XP, it is ugly, but it can run on 256MB RAM computer and easy to understand, too.

The words above was my thought.

Do you have the same thought the same as me?

My grammar is very bad......haha.

I am using this windows 7 since release date. i am so satisfied with it and i did not have any serious problems with it till now. If you have enough ram then its wonderful and smooth. All boring stuff of vista is gone in 7. almost all drivers are compatabile. the apperance of it and the simple use of the taskbar is a worth.

my system specs
Asus p5q pro
500 watt PSU
Intel dual core E8400
Asus 512 video card
6 GB 1066 DDR2
1.5 Tb hard disk

I am not sure if Windows 7 can be run under a mere 192 MB RAM under any circumstances. But the situation you are referring to is similar to Ubuntu live CD, it can run with 128MB RAM once installed but the live CD needs at least 256MB RAM. But Canonical (developer of Ubuntu) also provides a CLI based installers CD which can run under 128MB RAM, but in this case that's impossible.

The Microsoft can use the installer like WIndows Server 2003/XP.

Or they can use DOS.

Your Specs is very fast~~~

Sure you can install and run the Windows 7 Beta.

The best option is to automatically detect amount of available system RAM and give user a CLI/GUI based installer accordingly. MS should add this in their Windows 7 DVDs.

There just so happens to be a handy "Send Feedback" button on every window...

And one can remove it too, it it's annoying.

I like your opinions.

and I like CLI than GUI in installation.

CLI can display the errors that it can't display in the GUI.

GUI uses a lot of memory(RAM).

Apart from the system resource wasting, GUI is not that bad. And yes, installation related errors and subsequent information can be seen with the GUI too. I don't know if it's possible with Windows but in Mac OS X we can see the installer logs when installing it, over GUI.