Regarding Vista and its Memory usage: I was wrong. Deja Q is right.

[DS1]

I'd wondered why his Vista installation took up 1.8 GBs of RAM upon installation, and assumed he'd screwed something up. I assumed he had screwed something up. He hadn't.

Deja Q/Hypnotoad was right all along, and after buying 8GBs of RAM to test his statement, he is absolutely right. Vista is a RAM hog.

Deja Q/Hypnotoad, consider this my formal apology for all to see. While I didn't question your skills, I did question why your Vista installation ate up so much RAM.

Now I know why.

[Inchworm]

1. Bump this midday sucka!

2:30am confessions sounds like a Showtime special :D

:rofl:

[DS1]

3. It's nothing about Showtine, or even Skinemax

It's about me admitting I was wrong, and posting a formal apology for it.

[petronius]

2. Am I understanding correctly - 1.8 gigabytes just to run the freakin' thing?

That's ridiculous, at that level it better do all my work for me and give me a motherfuckin' foot massage...

[DS1]

4. I agree that's a ludicrous amount of RAM to set aside for the OS

but that was his point in the first place :)

[Lil Missy]

5. I don't know the technical details, but that Vista is a memory hog. Vista is shit!

Mine freezes up while watching Political Videos all the damn time. I have to kill DU and log on again. And sometimes reboot. This never happened with XP.

I don't know if this has anything to do with Vista eating up memory or not.

Deja Q knows his stuff. Very kind of you to acknowledge his skills and apologize publicly.

[Lil Missy]

6. .......

[hobbit709]

7. I knew Vista was a hog 2 years ago.

Take any given hardware configuration, run XP and Vista and compare performance. XP perfroms twice as fast on bootup, any given task, etc. And it's not full of that DRM crap. Of course the same hardware running Ubuntu 8.10 or Mandriva 2009 outperforms XP.
Windows 7-if they don't screw it up, will make Vista disappear about as fast as Windows ME did.

[NJmaverick]

8. I have been telling people if they want a computer with Vista

it MUST have 4 gigs of RAM and seperate video memory. With that configuration it will work well.

[hobbit709]

9. Not well, maybe faster.

[NJmaverick]

10. I read once that Vista was designed for systems with seperate video cards

not shared video memory and the fact that so many computers use shared video memory is one of their bigger problems.

[Bossy Monkey]

11. Now go to Disk Cleanup to see how big your Hibernation File is

I added 2 GBs of memory just to end the friggin' slowdowns, and was very very surprised to find out about the Hibernation File. I am told that it's a bad idea to delete it, but I am always tempted. Why are we giving Microsoft all our money again?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

12. K and R for one of the classiest apologies I have ever seen on here.

From one of my favorite DUers To one of my other favorite DUers. :toast:

[flvegan]

14. Agreed. Classy is the appropriate word here.

:thumbsup: to the OP.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

13. kick for a good move........

we could use more class like this around here. Good on ya, DS1 - now get back to your normal tom-foolery!

[Schema Thing]

15. This thread will never die

j/k



Just curious; why did your installation take less ram in the first place? Does the system see when you have more ram available, and then use it?

I've got a fairly new computer with 3 gigs, and I notice it is a dog; gotta do something to speed it up.

[Deja Q]

16. Didn't see this thread until now - thank you.

But you don't need to apologize; as I never really stated my system RAM complement until later on, on systems with 1~2GB of RAM, Vista would look as if it was using less (around 800MB on a 2GB system if I remember my previous laptop rightly)... not to forget to mention some of my own responses were offensive as well. I too owe an apology.

:pals:

With 8GB though, I bet Vista flies like a roadrunner on amphetamines for you. :) But it will see the RAM and load up with literally everything. It always drove me nuts, seeing 1.8x.

From what I've tested (via VM), Win7 is easier on the memory requirements, but I'm finding Ubuntu 8.10 to be rather nice a replacement. So far. (On startup, it uses around 450MB, and as I launch a couple browser sessions and WINE, it ultimately hovers around 1.0GB, even after closing all but one browser session...).